Originally Posted by scottryan
I have a couple questions with the 'scope drop test':

-Is this being performed by only one or two individuals...otherwise unsupervised? Is the parameter of the shooter being "on" for each scope being tested accounted for?
-Is the surface being dropped onto a constant?. Hard packed dirt. Pad or no pad. Snow pack??

Some of the faked tests are partially on video.

Random drop heights, surface unknown, variable impact points, horrible shooting form, improvised shooting rests, target impacts unknown, the list go on and on.

Traveling with rifle/scope in tool box with random tools.

Using 1.5 MOA rifle and factory ammo to discern .5-1 MOA shifts in zero.

Unsupervised just take his word for what happens.


Originally Posted by JohnBurns
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
Originally Posted by Brad
Originally Posted by bellydeep
I think for testing scopes Formadillo is probably very thorough.
I trust his reports.
Definitely wouldn’t take elk hunting advice from him though. Each have their virtues and vices.
+1
LOL.

So we all agree the guy is full of shit when he talks elk hunting but you 2 guys swallow his bullshit on scope testing?

Okay.
Originally Posted by bellydeep
Yeah. He’s batting .500

You’re batting 0

Nobody believes what you say about scopes or hunting. At least he’s got scopes.

LOL.

Enjoy your only view of a bull elk and you may thank me later.

[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]

Originally Posted by Starbuck
I might use his and others' results as data points, but only so far as they comport with my own use. I had previous experiences with some of the models he's tested that've done well and some that haven't, and my experiences weren't disparate from what he reported; by extension, it wasn't too difficult for me to see a degree of relevance in what he's doing.

But, I agree with you insofar as not blindly trusting some dude on the internet. Besides the credibility factor, many who report extensively on equipment likely stand something to gain based on what people ultimately buy or in how a brand is percieved. I pay for my own gear, and I'm not afraid to test it to the extent that it might see while being used in the field.

Over on RS, many are clamoring for certain models to be tested, and I wonder why they don't just test it themselves? It still surprises me that so many are quick to take what they read on the internet or elsewhere as unequivocal fact without verifying it for themselves.

Formy is not "some dude" on the internet.

He tries to hide his real history but it well known.
Originally Posted by Starbuck
Please elaborate on his real history. I have my thoughts based on maybe a decade of intermittently reading his posts as they pop up when I look into various topics; however, I can't say that I've specifically looked into his hx too far. The only thing I'd say I know about him is that he tries hard to obfuscate any details about what he has done or currently does that makes his findings more relevant and definitive than others'. And that he doesn't deal well with differences of opinion.

No offense to anyone in particular out there on the interwebs, but everyone is "some dude" unless I know them personally or they've otherwise proven in various ways why their findings and discernments are relevant. And even in cases where I trust the poster to a certain extent, I'm going to find out about whatever the recommendation or advice is for myself.

To me, honest reports of individual (not paid or influencer) use/testing on forums such as these is the info we wade through all the humor, despair, and back and forth to get to. That, and all the memes and gifs.

He wants to hide so I won't Dox him, just point out he's hiding as you noted.

It has always been his MO and most here caught on to the scam.

He has never shot in front of anyone here on the Campfire and for good reason.

John Burns

I have all the sources.
They can't stop the signal.