Maybe a bit of a complex question here. (And this isn't a post about who's brand is better.)
Some scopes out there have a rep for tremendous ruggedness. Bang 'em around, mount 'em on a .50 cal, and they're fine. SB, USO, etc.
Then there are some brands where people have reported their scopes busting, especially when used with a higher power caliber. IOR, Leup, Bush, etc. (That's just based on what I've gleaned from peoples' posts here--not my own experience with these scopes.)
Ok...for those scopes that have a rep for busting, does anyone know if the determining factor is felt recoil...or something more complex?
I'll give a real world example. I have a Sako TRG (15 lbs) 300 Win Mag w muzzle brake and a Steyr Pro Hunter (8 lbs) 7mm-08. Felt recoil on the TRG is significantly less than the Pro Hunter. Logic would suggest that the TRG is likewise "easier" on the scope than the Pro Hunter. But is there a hidden factor that my shoulder isn't perceiving, but that is nonetheless harder on scopes?
Thanks,
Nik
Some scopes out there have a rep for tremendous ruggedness. Bang 'em around, mount 'em on a .50 cal, and they're fine. SB, USO, etc.
Then there are some brands where people have reported their scopes busting, especially when used with a higher power caliber. IOR, Leup, Bush, etc. (That's just based on what I've gleaned from peoples' posts here--not my own experience with these scopes.)
Ok...for those scopes that have a rep for busting, does anyone know if the determining factor is felt recoil...or something more complex?
I'll give a real world example. I have a Sako TRG (15 lbs) 300 Win Mag w muzzle brake and a Steyr Pro Hunter (8 lbs) 7mm-08. Felt recoil on the TRG is significantly less than the Pro Hunter. Logic would suggest that the TRG is likewise "easier" on the scope than the Pro Hunter. But is there a hidden factor that my shoulder isn't perceiving, but that is nonetheless harder on scopes?
Thanks,
Nik