Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Leupold finally built it

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.

turret block has a pretty good belly, wonder if in the henneberger 30mm 3.5's it will ride on the rail? those looking for getting best alignments to sporter stocks may wanna have a peek at that, will be fun to see how these go, sadly need more 1" beefy stuff but you really gotta watch for belly hang on 1" as weaver detach top mount lows really get down

edit, crap, I can see the incoming insults and jokes now...sorry guys

They might not want to permanently bond their action to a chassis/stock. Just a hunch....

It's just data. People get worked up about it because they have an emotional attachment to a scope (or financial like tres chins)

LOL.

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




Formy is not "some dude" on the internet.

He tries to hide his real history but it well known.

The gizard must've finally arose from his hangover

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??

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.

You could answer your questions with little effort

That's a bit of a fallacy. Plenty of non bonded rigs do well with retaining zero after a fall or drop. And even if they don't, wouldn't you care to know the specific part of your shooting system that might let you down if/when confronted with adversity?

Thanks for the reply.

You wanted to know why others don't just do it themselves. I gave you a possibility. If you don't like that, ok. Go ask these hypothetical people and b itch at them

Isn't that true of all questions?

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.



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.

Lol lol lol

Brother Burns,

Just because you’ve always required supervision doesn’t mean it’s the same for everyone.

Well, I'm not going to the length of accusing anyone of flat out faking the tests, but without a constant control group, multiple units of each scope tested, and constant environmental parameters, it could be easy to give more "attention" to those brands that one wanted to see pass such tests, and less to those that might be pandering to the crowd to fail. Just doesn't seem to be very well controlled.

Thank you sir. I mistakenly thought I was on a forum.