|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 10,697
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 10,697 |
Hands on is a powerful means of quantifying nuance...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,448
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,448 |
Why should I ? I trust Mule Deer to do fair and unbiased testing. I'd rather pay him and people like him for their experiences so I can make good choices in my equipment. E E, So if that's the case, why wouldn't you trust Frank's assessment?
Some shooting knowledge: Don't stand in front of the muzzle. Some hunting knowledge: Too much noise ruins the hunt.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,580
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,580 |
Or you could buy one yourself and give it a go. That would make waaaaay too much sense.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,668
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,668 |
Two reasons why I would not trust Frank's assessment. First of all, he made the comment about the failed Leupold and said that was usual. Why ? What's that got to do with testing a new scope or scopes ?
However, if he wants to test one model by one manufacturer against another, he needs to do level playing field testing. He didn't.
For the record, lots of other shooters here have bought and run the SWFA SS Scopes. Most of them appear to use the fixed magnification scopes. Therefore I'll buy the that they are a good scope and a real deal price wise.
But that doesn't necessarly apply to the variables unless they have been tested under like conditions against other well known scopes like the same level Leupolds.
I am aware of no such testing. What I have seen are comments like Frank's about Leupolds in general. Or FormD's comments that he has "broken" several VX-R Patrols. Such comments are not similar to the experiences of others that I've known. It has gone so far as some in the tactical crowd saying in any given match, they see "30-40% of the Leupold fail (models and histories not mentioned) vs. almost nothing in the way of Nightforce or S&B. Who make nothing but high end scopes BTW. Funny the people I know personally, some of whom shoot tactical competition, haven't noticed that about high end Leupolds vs. other high end brands
So I'm suspicious of tests by such people as Frank and FormD. E
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,854
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,854 |
As a hunter/shooter do I have to just pick one: reliable or bright. How does the Nightforce stack up optically? If forced to pick I know which one it would be... I purchased a Nightforce 12-42X56. On another occasion I had the pleasure to compare a Nighforce 5 1/2-22X56 with some of my scopes. The two Nightforces are in a league above my Swarovski z5 5-25X52 for normal day and low light. The reliability of Nightforces is legendary.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation."
Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,448
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,448 |
Two reasons why I would not trust Frank's assessment. First of all, he made the comment about the failed Leupold and said that was usual. Why ? What's that got to do with testing a new scope or scopes ?
However, if he wants to test one model by one manufacturer against another, he needs to do level playing field testing. He didn't.
For the record, lots of other shooters here have bought and run the SWFA SS Scopes. Most of them appear to use the fixed magnification scopes. Therefore I'll buy the that they are a good scope and a real deal price wise.
But that doesn't necessarly apply to the variables unless they have been tested under like conditions against other well known scopes like the same level Leupolds.
I am aware of no such testing. What I have seen are comments like Frank's about Leupolds in general. Or FormD's comments that he has "broken" several VX-R Patrols. Such comments are not similar to the experiences of others that I've known. It has gone so far as some in the tactical crowd saying in any given match, they see "30-40% of the Leupold fail (models and histories not mentioned) vs. almost nothing in the way of Nightforce or S&B. Who make nothing but high end scopes BTW. Funny the people I know personally, some of whom shoot tactical competition, haven't noticed that about high end Leupolds vs. other high end brands
So I'm suspicious of tests by such people as Frank and FormD. E Ah. In other words, if people who have vast experience formulate opinions that differ from yours, their conclusions are not valid.
Some shooting knowledge: Don't stand in front of the muzzle. Some hunting knowledge: Too much noise ruins the hunt.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 12,095
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 12,095 |
I know these real life tests are terribly upsetting to you so perhaps you should ignore them. Granted Form and his ilk subject scopes to demands far greater then you would in 10 lifetimes, however the SWFA SS scopes are being tested against scopes intended for the same use and abuse. Actually, they seem to fail miserably. When do you reckon the Military contracts are gonna start rolling in for SWFA.   To say anything in that post is a "test" would be stretching, and not by a little. Good to see the Leupold Derangement Syndrome. Carry on, fellas.
John Burns
I have all the sources.
They can't stop the signal.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 20,379
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 20,379 |
Two reasons why I would not trust Frank's assessment. First of all, he made the comment about the failed Leupold and said that was usual. Why ? What's that got to do with testing a new scope or scopes ?
However, if he wants to test one model by one manufacturer against another, he needs to do level playing field testing. He didn't.
For the record, lots of other shooters here have bought and run the SWFA SS Scopes. Most of them appear to use the fixed magnification scopes. Therefore I'll buy the that they are a good scope and a real deal price wise.
But that doesn't necessarly apply to the variables unless they have been tested under like conditions against other well known scopes like the same level Leupolds.
I am aware of no such testing. What I have seen are comments like Frank's about Leupolds in general. Or FormD's comments that he has "broken" several VX-R Patrols. Such comments are not similar to the experiences of others that I've known. It has gone so far as some in the tactical crowd saying in any given match, they see "30-40% of the Leupold fail (models and histories not mentioned) vs. almost nothing in the way of Nightforce or S&B. Who make nothing but high end scopes BTW. Funny the people I know personally, some of whom shoot tactical competition, haven't noticed that about high end Leupolds vs. other high end brands
So I'm suspicious of tests by such people as Frank and FormD. E Ah. In other words, if people who have vast experience formulate opinions that differ from yours, their conclusions are not valid. Yep.
I replace valve cover gaskets every 50K, if they don't need them sooner...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,874
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,874 |
Between this and the other SWFA thread what I'm hearing is that the SWFA is bombproof, but too dim to hunt early morning or evening?
20x classic is dim. Not the same as the 6x.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,748
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,748 |
20x classic is dim. Not the same as the 6x. Wow.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 18,453
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 18,453 |
Why should I ? I trust Mule Deer to do fair and unbiased testing. I'd rather pay him and people like him for their experiences so I can make good choices in my equipment. E Ohremicus,
Sorry, but apparently I have to post something like this now and then, because you're still wandering around in the mists of the 1990's, and continue to put words in my mouth.
I've tested the SWFA scopes thoroughly, and am a fan--and not because Chris Farris sent me any. Instead I bought them. The ONLY Leupold I've found to track as well after a lot of shooting is the 10x40 Mark 4 I've had for several years and shot a bunch on several rifles. But for a reasonably-priced, tough, accurate-tracking scope the SWFA's are leading the pack.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,039
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,039 |
Two reasons why I would not trust Frank's assessment. First of all, he made the comment about the failed Leupold and said that was usual. Why ? What's that got to do with testing a new scope or scopes ?
However, if he wants to test one model by one manufacturer against another, he needs to do level playing field testing. He didn't.
For the record, lots of other shooters here have bought and run the SWFA SS Scopes. Most of them appear to use the fixed magnification scopes. Therefore I'll buy the that they are a good scope and a real deal price wise.
But that doesn't necessarly apply to the variables unless they have been tested under like conditions against other well known scopes like the same level Leupolds.
I am aware of no such testing. What I have seen are comments like Frank's about Leupolds in general. Or FormD's comments that he has "broken" several VX-R Patrols. Such comments are not similar to the experiences of others that I've known. It has gone so far as some in the tactical crowd saying in any given match, they see "30-40% of the Leupold fail (models and histories not mentioned) vs. almost nothing in the way of Nightforce or S&B. Who make nothing but high end scopes BTW. Funny the people I know personally, some of whom shoot tactical competition, haven't noticed that about high end Leupolds vs. other high end brands
So I'm suspicious of tests by such people as Frank and FormD. E Ah. In other words, if people who have vast experience formulate opinions that differ from yours, their conclusions are not valid. Yep. We have a winner!!! E has to justify his purchase!!!
"If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?"
Vince Lombardi
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,110
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,110 |
Ohremicus,
Few things in hunting equipment have changed as much as rifle scopes over the past 15-20 years. I still use a lot of Leupolds, mostly fixed-powers and in particular fixed 6's. But ALL brands of scopes have changed considerably since the 1990's.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,874
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,874 |
20x classic is dim. Not the same as the 6x. Wow. He was referring to a thread about 16x and 20x scopes. Of course they are dim and not representative of the 6x or 10x.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,668
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,668 |
Yes, Mule Deer, I do understand that. My comments about the Zeiss Conquests refers to them in the 90's when they were hyped a much better than similar Leupolds. As you have pointed out, they haven't been like that for some time.
I just mailed off a check so I can recieve Rifle Loony News and I'm looking forward to your next book on hunting optics. E
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 20,379
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 20,379 |
You weren't refering to the conquests of the 90's.
Give us a freeking break.
I replace valve cover gaskets every 50K, if they don't need them sooner...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,893
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,893 |
It's never been tough to cypher who shoots and who doesn't.
Imagination and Pretend,are all that some folks have.
Hint.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,219
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,219 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,110
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,110 |
Ohremicus,
Thanks. Publication of the new book is scheduled for November.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,344
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,344 |
New book on optics? Title?
IIRC... from some of your magazine articles scopes are getting way better in recent years????????????
Where is the light weight hold-zero-and-track, 300 $ scope?
You would think these scope makers would get a clue and make things more rugged.
Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven.
|
|
|
|
|
596 members (12344mag, 10gaugeman, 10gaugemag, 160user, 1234, 007FJ, 56 invisible),
2,806
guests, and
1,297
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,611
Posts18,473,867
Members73,941
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
