Armory Sponsor
Posted: 2/17/2007 6:28:00 PM EDT
|
What were the three scopes that the FCSA determined to be the only ones that would hold up to a 50 cal? I know the NightForce was one, I think the Leo Mk4 was one, but can't remember them for sure. Was the SS scopes even compared? |
|
Seeing how I told Septic Tank that I would break out the old issues and pass along what they tested I guess I better get to it a little faster. The FCSA didn't test the Nightforce & Leupold Mk-IV scopes as they are known in the .50 world for their durability. The tests ran over three issues and there was ALOT of info, wish I could photo copy it and post it here. Even then it would take up a few pages to post the whole article. |
Could you somehow make a .pdf file out of the scans? |
Fifty Caliber Shooters Association sells back issues. If you check their website or even give them a call, I'm sure they could hook you up. And, not trying be a preacher, but everbody that owns a .50BMG should pony up and join the FCSA. They are protecting our specific enjoyment of this caliber and are the central clearinghouse for .50BMG issues and information. (You obviously already know that or you would not respect their opionions on scope testing ) (not directed at number40Fan, he was just asking a question, and nothing wrong with providingthat kind of answer, but actually copying articles is probably a copyright issue and (imho) morally wrong if you are a .50BMG shooter.) Count the money you spend on membership and back issues as a gift to the sport. Just my turn on the soapbox.Nightforce and Loopy were not tested b/c of their rep, and I can not remember the others. I can check my back issues and see if I can find the results. |
|
Ditto what FiftyCalAl said about the FCSA! her US Optics was not tested either. |
I started out putting an NCstar on mine because I blew all my money on the rifle and ammo initially.  When I saved the money, I ordered a 20X SS from SWFA. I must have gotten a lemon 'cause the top knob did not have positive clicks and I couldn't even get it zeroed. I am positive that SWFA will take care of it, based on all the good feedback on them from here and because they told me they would. I just need to get off my ass and send it back. Anyway, after I got frustrated at the SS, I put the NCstar back on and it has held zero so far for approx. 550 rounds and hasn't broken yet. Not too shabby for a $120 (delivered) scope off of egay.  For the record, I'd LOVE to have a nightforce but things have tightened up in the budget since we added a fifth manchild to the family. 
|
well? |
|
I'm going to do my best here as the three part issue was big and after reading it again I found it very vague on issues. The second part had nothing to do with the test on anything other then mounting the scope. Different bases/rings and how to lap rings and mount everything. This is from the first part as it basically went on about the whole test and the different things they wanted to do. Here's the original scopes in the test, by the 3rd part a couple more were thrown in. BSA 4 Star 6-24x40mm (1" tube) Burris Black Diamond 6-24x56mm (30mm tube) Bushnell 42-4165m 4-16x50mm (1" tube) Kahles AH 3-9x42mm TDS (1" tube) Millet VTS BK 30720 4-16x56mm (30mm tube) Nikon 6535 3.5-10x50mm (1" tube) 5.5-16.5x44mm added later. Pentax 89532 8.5-32x50mm (30mm tube) S&B LM PMII Mildot (34mm tube) Sheperd (side) 310 P1A (1" tube) Shepard (side) 618V1 (1" tube) Sightron SII 4-16x42D (1" tube) Springfield 4-14x50mm (30mm tube) Swarovski PV 3-12x50L TDS (30mm tube) Tasco #TAC 8-40x56mm (30mm tube) Weaver GS 800475 4.5-14x40mm (1" tube) ATN 12-36 added later Horris 4-16 added later Issues looked at were eye relief (min & max), MOA adjustments, paralax, rigidity of the scope. The author went on to give his views on different aspects of each scope including ease of use of the scope. Two scopes that he didn't care for were the Sheperd & Springfield as he didn't like the complexity of the reticles. Other then that he talked about light transmission of lenses of which he didn't test any but made a general statement about it. This is from the 3rd part as I already said what was covered in the second. Basically the test started out with good intention but like he said went down hill during the test. Here's part of the initial testing. The S&B was never tested as they sent the original rings back with the original scope and S&B sent a newer version but no rings. The Sightron W&E adjustments wouldn't function properly. ATN Elevation wouldn't function properly Horris Focus parallax would not turn wasn't tested. BSA Never settled in during strings Bushnell had vertical settling in the string Scope's clarity/flatness BSA-marginal/fair Millet-poor/very poor Shepard-poor/good the other model was fair/good Tasco-poor/very good Nothing was noted on the ATN All others ranged from good to excellent on both. Here's the conclusions of the testing. Four of the 19 tested were faulty as received or failed during test. At least 3 others may have failed during accuracy testing or were damaged during durability testing. 47% of tested scopes claimed to be up to the rigors of the .50, couldn't make it. Most have insufficient internal adjustments/eye relief for use on a .50. Basically there was alot to read and in the end the reader was left with a big ??? as to what really happened. It came down to time & money to do alot of real world testing to see how long it would take to see what scopes would fail. And how many shots it would take before each one failed. There were lots of notes and graphs for each type of test and how each scope faired (kind of). |
|
The S&B didn't fail and here's the rest of the story. They received the scope with rings (S&B sent them as they're 34mm) from S&B and before they started S&B told them that they had an updated version. So the Author returned the scope with the rings to S&B to get the updated version. S&B sent the newer scope but didn't send a pair of rings with the scope (probably thinking they had the other set). They didn't have time to get a set of rings (guess they never heard of overnight shipping) before they started the test. So there it is, the S&B didn't fail as it was never tested. |
Armory Sponsor