Maven RS.2 Next Update?

[RepeatPete]

I think if Maven updates the RS.2 2-10x38 and adds a FFP model with the SHR-MIL reticle, providing it passes the drop test and the weight is around 16 oz., (current is 12 oz., not sure how much going to FFP will add) it would be unbeatable for a mountain hunting scope.
The NXS is 21 oz and doesn’t have as good of a reticle, and the SWFA 3-9 seems to have not quite as good of glass, and is unavailable. Those are the only real “competitors” that I see.

I emailed this suggestion to Maven, and they responded within an hour, stating they would pass the request along, and “You never know what is coming up next!” …

 

[steelheadmike]

It will probably be announced right after everyone buys the RS1.2 in mil next month.

 

[bruceleroy]

I would pre-pay that even if it was a year out as long as the reticle is the awesome mil found in the 1.2

 

[MidGAHunter]

I have sent the exact same suggestion to Maven. Hopefully others do as well and they will make it happen. I'd be fine if it came in at 19-20 oz without illumination. I'm still buying another RS 1.2 when they come back in stock though.

 

[echampion8]

I’m all for the mil reticle but I still don’t understand why anyone would need a ffp for a scope that is max 10x. In order to need enough holdover, you’d be easily past 250 on most hunting cartridges. At that distance why would anyone not want to be on 10x while shooting?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[z987k]

I'd want to see parallax adjustment on it as well.

 

[Formidilosus]

I’m all for the mil reticle but I still don’t understand why anyone would need a ffp for a scope that is max 10x. In order to need enough holdover, you’d be easily past 250 on most hunting cartridges. At that distance why would anyone not want to be on 10x while shooting?

Yes. FOV matters far more than magnification. The vast majority of kills that I am apart of out to around 700-800 yards the scope ends up on 6-8x.

 

[ChrisAU]

That and with a 38mm scope especially I may not want to dial up to 10x for light reasons. May be perfectly legal and 100% ethical but a shot where I’d want to hold wind with 10 minutes of legal light may be way more visible at 6-8x than 10x.

 

[ChrisAU]

Oh, and I’d buy 3 of them day one!

 

[texasbbq]

I'd be fine with the current RS.2 if it allowed for their elevation turret replacement. Oh, and parallax wouldn't be bad either.

 

[prm]

FFP, durable, good reticle, 10x max, 20ish oz, I’m in.

 

[JCMCUBIC]

I would guess that to go FFP and add an elevation turret, they would need to move from 1" to 30mm on the tube. The 30mm tube would be stronger than a 1" tube, but there would be a weight trade off. The x38 objective is fine with me, but I'd be ok with 42 as well...said mainly with the idea that it's a more common production size for glass/tubes/etc from third party manufacturing.

If reliable, it would probably sell like crazy. There is a proven market for it, and current scopes that fill that niche are either unavailable or have compromises. I'd certainly jump on it. The SHR-MIL is just a great reticle for all around use.

 

[RepeatPete]

I agree that they likely would go to a 30mm tube, but I’m a big fan of staying 1” for the weight.

Is anyone from Maven on here to tag to this thread?

 

[Moosehunter]

I'd buy at least one instantly..
Id prefer a 3-9 or ultimately a 2-8
Edit: or even 2-6
I've been enjoying my 6x. But wish I had less power in the tight timber

 

[4th_point]

I’m all for the mil reticle but I still don’t understand why anyone would need a ffp for a scope that is max 10x. In order to need enough holdover, you’d be easily past 250 on most hunting cartridges. At that distance why would anyone not want to be on 10x while shooting?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1) SFP has the risk of zero shift between magnification settings

2) Not everyone needs or wants 10x, even past 250