|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,109
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,109 |
I said this at the time. Guess what the mob here made fun of me and attacked me personally instead of addressing exactly what they felt I said was incorrect. Form talked about shooting 100k rounds through rifles with a specific scope. Then all he ever showed was pics of tikkas with factory barrels still on them.
A lot of people swallowed everything he said with baited breath. He got plenty of members here to start throwing their rifles on the ground to test their scopes.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,938 Likes: 1
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,938 Likes: 1 |
Interestingly enough, I just listened to a podcast that Form was on with the Shoot to Hunt guys (Avery owns Rokslide) from a year ago or so, where he emphatically stated that he has never received a single dollar from any firearm industry forum, and was clear that he isn't paid by Rokslide.
Did talk about a bunch of industry guys being butthurt about their scopes being evaluated though. And people being butthurt when their favorite brand doesn't do well. Which, that sounds pretty legit give how the optics forum goes around here. Formy (Chuck) lies about his testing and everything else. Everyone who knows understands he just a liar about everything from scope testing to hunting experience. It's easy to see for the Players but some of the Fans get sucked in. The Maven tests are clear examples of his fake testing and bias. To be clear I like and use Maven scopes and can smile at how Formy had to quit lying on Rokslide about how the Maven scopes performed. You left out that you have a business relationship/financial interest in Maven. And Leupold.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,777 Likes: 6
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,777 Likes: 6 |
Blindly trusting any anonymous online user doesn’t seem like a good practice. With this, I agree. I'm no guru of optics or firearms expert, I have no bias from any company/sponsor/etc. I play with a lot of scopes and a lot of rifles, it's what I enjoy. Looking at my first hand use and experience with an unbiased approach, it lines up with results Formidilosus reports. I haven't played with all that he has and I don't shoot as much as he does...my sample is limited. I haven't had issues with one brand he had fail...but I've also not used it hard. I've had one model, of one brand he favors, fail miserably that he didn't in his test. In many cases, it doesn't require a drop test to see it. It simply shows up when sighting in and checking zero. I shouldn't say I'm unbiased. There are certain scopes I want to work, I'm pulling for them, but if they don't adjust correctly or have a wondering zero, I just have to go by what I see. Overall, what I see in my use lines up with what he reports.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 42,640 Likes: 4
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 42,640 Likes: 4 |
Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me..
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221 |
Blindly trusting any anonymous online user doesn’t seem like a good practice. This is also my take on the situation.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221 |
Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. Works for me, too. Trust but verify is how I regard most information. Too many people, especially on the internet, have a financial or other interest in what others use. And some don't know enough to be giving advice - there's a minimally known gun writer who frequently uses a gun range where I meet up with a couple of buddies a few times a year. Have ran into this dude on several occasions, and the majority of what he passes off as expertise to anyone within earshot is minimally correct or outright BS. We just shake our heads and feel bad for the guys who get sucked in and follow his advice.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,280 Likes: 14
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,280 Likes: 14 |
Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. The only way to fly IMO.
It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 23,521 Likes: 15
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 23,521 Likes: 15 |
I miss the cringe worthy hunting stories. Lol
At least he did hunt though.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,551 Likes: 7
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,551 Likes: 7 |
Blindly trusting any anonymous online user doesn’t seem like a good practice. With this, I agree. I'm no guru of optics or firearms expert, I have no bias from any company/sponsor/etc. I play with a lot of scopes and a lot of rifles, it's what I enjoy. Looking at my first hand use and experience with an unbiased approach, it lines up with results Formidilosus reports. I haven't played with all that he has and I don't shoot as much as he does...my sample is limited. I haven't had issues with one brand he had fail...but I've also not used it hard. I've had one model, of one brand he favors, fail miserably that he didn't in his test. In many cases, it doesn't require a drop test to see it. It simply shows up when sighting in and checking zero. I shouldn't say I'm unbiased. There are certain scopes I want to work, I'm pulling for them, but if they don't adjust correctly or have a wondering zero, I just have to go by what I see. Overall, what I see in my use lines up with what he reports. +1
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,551 Likes: 7
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,551 Likes: 7 |
Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. Works for me, too. Trust but verify is how I regard most information. Too many people, especially on the internet, have a financial or other interest in what others use. And some don't know enough to be giving advice - there's a minimally known gun writer who frequently uses a gun range where I meet up with a couple of buddies a few times a year. Have ran into this dude on several occasions, and the majority of what he passes off as expertise to anyone within earshot is minimally correct or outright BS. We just shake our heads and feel bad for the guys who get sucked in and follow his advice. Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. The only way to fly IMO. This thread is quite the witch hunt. Most forum members wouldn’t be here if they weren’t interested in perspectives beyond their own limited experience set. That’s really the value that forums like this one provide. Most all of us are interested in data/info from other users, and Form’s stories and results are simply another data point. Some data are more useful than others, and some data sources are more credible and authoritative than others. IMO, it makes sense to take the data on the internet for what it is worth, consider the source, and weight the data accordingly.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,669 Likes: 43
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,669 Likes: 43 |
Blindly trusting any anonymous online user doesn’t seem like a good practice. This really sums it up. I wouldn’t buy or use anything I have read about on the campfire for the endorsement it gets here. It doesn’t take more than 4 posts on any subject before it is bashed and destroyed by someone that knows more or less…
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 39,301 Likes: 40
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 39,301 Likes: 40 |
Blindly trusting any anonymous online user doesn’t seem like a good practice. Agreed but it gets spicy around here when that online user being distrusted or disagreed with is you. (royal you)
Me
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221 |
Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. Works for me, too. Trust but verify is how I regard most information. Too many people, especially on the internet, have a financial or other interest in what others use. And some don't know enough to be giving advice - there's a minimally known gun writer who frequently uses a gun range where I meet up with a couple of buddies a few times a year. Have ran into this dude on several occasions, and the majority of what he passes off as expertise to anyone within earshot is minimally correct or outright BS. We just shake our heads and feel bad for the guys who get sucked in and follow his advice. Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. The only way to fly IMO. This thread is quite the witch hunt. Most forum members wouldn’t be here if they weren’t interested in perspectives beyond their own limited experience set. That’s really the value that forums like this one provide. Most all of us are interested in data/info from other users, and Form’s stories and results are simply another data point. Some data are more useful than others, and some data sources are more credible and authoritative than others. IMO, it makes sense to take the data on the internet for what it is worth, consider the source, and weight the data accordingly. Jordan: So, basically, trust but verify? I'd call it more of a which hunt, as in which information do you take into consideration and which information do you disregard.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,280 Likes: 14
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,280 Likes: 14 |
Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. Works for me, too. Trust but verify is how I regard most information. Too many people, especially on the internet, have a financial or other interest in what others use. And some don't know enough to be giving advice - there's a minimally known gun writer who frequently uses a gun range where I meet up with a couple of buddies a few times a year. Have ran into this dude on several occasions, and the majority of what he passes off as expertise to anyone within earshot is minimally correct or outright BS. We just shake our heads and feel bad for the guys who get sucked in and follow his advice. Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. The only way to fly IMO. This thread is quite the witch hunt. Most forum members wouldn’t be here if they weren’t interested in perspectives beyond their own limited experience set. That’s really the value that forums like this one provide. Most all of us are interested in data/info from other users, and Form’s stories and results are simply another data point. Some data are more useful than others, and some data sources are more credible and authoritative than others. IMO, it makes sense to take the data on the internet for what it is worth, consider the source, and weight the data accordingly. It entirely depends on who the source is. You're obviously good to go, but many loudmouths here are not. That's why I find a source I trust, buy it myself, try it myself, use it myself, and form my own opinion. I've done it with the Tract Toric when they first came out, currently the arken EP4's, VX6, Athlon Ares BTR, Meopta scopes and binos when they first started marketing them under their own name, etc.
It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,580
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,580 |
This really sums it up. I wouldn’t buy or use anything I have read about on the campfire for the endorsement it gets here. It doesn’t take more than 4 posts on any subject before it is bashed and destroyed by someone that knows more or less… Yup. I've moved on to other sources, as here it seems to be "all" fail or "all" are always perfect, which is the sure sign of a shill.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,580
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,580 |
I've done it with the Tract Toric when they first came out, currently the arken EP4's, VX6, Athlon Ares BTR, Meopta scopes and binos when they first started marketing them under their own name, etc. Check out the Ares ETR UHD line if you like the BTR. I'm impressed with the one we put on my son's .22. WAAAAAAY better glass than the Helos line.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,551 Likes: 7
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,551 Likes: 7 |
Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. Works for me, too. Trust but verify is how I regard most information. Too many people, especially on the internet, have a financial or other interest in what others use. And some don't know enough to be giving advice - there's a minimally known gun writer who frequently uses a gun range where I meet up with a couple of buddies a few times a year. Have ran into this dude on several occasions, and the majority of what he passes off as expertise to anyone within earshot is minimally correct or outright BS. We just shake our heads and feel bad for the guys who get sucked in and follow his advice. Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. The only way to fly IMO. This thread is quite the witch hunt. Most forum members wouldn’t be here if they weren’t interested in perspectives beyond their own limited experience set. That’s really the value that forums like this one provide. Most all of us are interested in data/info from other users, and Form’s stories and results are simply another data point. Some data are more useful than others, and some data sources are more credible and authoritative than others. IMO, it makes sense to take the data on the internet for what it is worth, consider the source, and weight the data accordingly. Jordan: So, basically, trust but verify? I'd call it more of a which hunt, as in which information do you take into consideration and which information do you disregard. Pretty much, though as I mentioned, the amount of trust should be weighted according to the credibility/authority of the source. Which is another way of describing your “which hunt.”
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,551 Likes: 7
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,551 Likes: 7 |
Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. Works for me, too. Trust but verify is how I regard most information. Too many people, especially on the internet, have a financial or other interest in what others use. And some don't know enough to be giving advice - there's a minimally known gun writer who frequently uses a gun range where I meet up with a couple of buddies a few times a year. Have ran into this dude on several occasions, and the majority of what he passes off as expertise to anyone within earshot is minimally correct or outright BS. We just shake our heads and feel bad for the guys who get sucked in and follow his advice. Why not just trust yourself and your experience? Works for me.. The only way to fly IMO. This thread is quite the witch hunt. Most forum members wouldn’t be here if they weren’t interested in perspectives beyond their own limited experience set. That’s really the value that forums like this one provide. Most all of us are interested in data/info from other users, and Form’s stories and results are simply another data point. Some data are more useful than others, and some data sources are more credible and authoritative than others. IMO, it makes sense to take the data on the internet for what it is worth, consider the source, and weight the data accordingly. It entirely depends on who the source is. You're obviously good to go, but many loudmouths here are not. That's why I find a source I trust, buy it myself, try it myself, use it myself, and form my own opinion. I've done it with the Tract Toric when they first came out, currently the arken EP4's, VX6, Athlon Ares BTR, Meopta scopes and binos when they first started marketing them under their own name, etc. Right on, JG. My last sentence and your first one are essentially saying the same thing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,280 Likes: 14
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,280 Likes: 14 |
And I'd like to think I give credit where credit is due when something works as advertised. You and GregW rec'd the LRHS's to me a few years ago and you were 100% correct about it's reliability and usefuleness and still are for that matter.
It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221 |
I said this at the time. Guess what the mob here made fun of me and attacked me personally instead of addressing exactly what they felt I said was incorrect. Form talked about shooting 100k rounds through rifles with a specific scope. Then all he ever showed was pics of tikkas with factory barrels still on them.
A lot of people swallowed everything he said with baited breath. It's been some time, but wasn't your longstanding beef with him derived from an argument over how many shots he got out of a barrel, wherein he was referring to total shots through an action and you misread it as shots through one barrel? Seems I read several posts from you in various threads that referenced Form's infamous barrel.
|
|
|
|
289 members (22magnut, 1OntarioJim, 1badf350, 12344mag, 06hunter59, 29 invisible),
2,211
guests, and
973
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,760
Posts18,515,025
Members74,017
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|