What this thread is:
Last year I did a 2018 review blog thread It worked out well in 2018 and I think the concept has value as a way to keep me on schedule, keep the companies involved updated, and provide a place for you readers to discuss and comment on things. I'll update the thread from time to time with what is going on a well as eventually link to the completed reviews. You guys can comment, question, or sound off as you like.

This year I spend a good deal of time reporting on the new products I saw and found interesting in my Shot Show 2019 blog thread. Doing this generated a few leads for products too review this year and, as the first product arrived two days ago, I decided it was time to start up this thread for the year and let you know what I have slated for this year.


Norma 77gr SMK .223rem and 130gr Scirocco II 6.5CM ammo just arrived

Sub $1k long range optics reviews:
Last year I did reveiws of 3 sub $1k, ffp, mil/mil, long range rifle scopes. These were the Sightron SIIISS624X50LRFFP/MH, Athlon Midas TAC 6-24x50mm, and Athlon Ares BTR 4.5-27x50 FFP IR Mil. These reviews went very well and the products in them surprised me with their performance. One of the highlights of the show for me was the Meopta Optika 6 scopes that fit in this category. That went right on my list for this year. Frank also asked me to do a review on a Nikon Black he had which pleased me since one of those was originally slated form my sub $1k reviews but just never arrived. I may also do a low cost Acme scope and a higher cost (~1.2k street) Athlon Ares ETR that they guys at Athlon wanted me to take a look at. Of course, all of these are tentative at this point, and I am not sure yet what power ranges of some of them I will be examining, but the rundown of possibilities so far is:

Meopta Optika 6
Nikon Black
Acme
Athlon Ares ETR

Factory Ammo article and updates to custom rifle reviews:
During the process of doing reviews of two custom rifles last year,  the Kelbly's Atlas tactical, and Mesa Precision Arms Crux Ti, I did a substantial amount of ammo testing of high end factory loads. Quite frankly, it performed better than I had expected, a credit to both the rifles as well as the ammo. Frank, from SnipersHide, had done a factory ammo article a few years back in which he concluded that current factory ammo could perform this way. This was why I had done the factory ammo testing in those rifles.

This year I will be continuing factory ammo testing on those two review rifles as well as a few other rifles. I'll add that data to those rifle reviews and also put together a separate: factory ammo, what to expect, article on what sort of results a should expect to be able to get with a factory load that is both good, and a good fit for their particular rifle. The first ammo for this arrived yesterday. It is NormaUSA .223rem 77gr SMK, and Norma 6.5CM Scirocco II 130gr. There will also be some more Lapua coming shortly.

Spin off reviews:
The Mesa Precision Arms Crux Ti, had a some pretty lengthy sections on TriggerTech Triggers and McMillan stocks. I'm going to finish my thoughts on these and spin them off into full reviews. This will include something on each of their new products from SHOT 2019. These will certainly be the first reviews done this year and the first should be done this weekend.

Zero Comp and Athlon Spotter
The Zero Compromise ZC420 and Athlon Cronus Tactical 7-42x60 mil spotter were both products I saw for the first time at SHOT this year (I skipped the 2018 show) and which caught my eye. They asked me to review them and I was interested in reviewing them. I'm excited to see how each performs.

Update 4-21-2019

The first review of 2019 is on the McMillan Edge Carbon Adjustable Game Warden stock and it is up.  This is shorter review that is a spin off of the big Mesa Precision Arms Crux custom rifle review I did last year. It has some of that reviews text but has been expanded to include some discussion on chassis systems vs. composite stocks. It also talks a little about their A10 model that I saw at SHOT Show 2019.

I will be doing one more of these spin off reviews on TriggerTech triggers in a month or so. This will cover my experiences with the Primary and Diamond triggers as well as a bit on their new two stages that I saw this year at SHOT.

Update 4-26-2019

The second batch of ammo for this years reviews arrived today. This is the bundle from Capstone Precision group and includes both 69gr Lapua .223rem and 140gr Berger 6.5CM. The Lapua .223 is the same ammunition that performed so well in the Kelbly's Atlas Tactical custom rifle review last year. This Lapua was the best performing round in the Kelbly. It turned in significantly better than .5MOA average 5rd 100yd performance during that rifle review with a few groups going sub .25" and a velocity SD of 20fps. Because of this, I ordered up a bunch of it to use this year while doing the rifle scope reviews planned. The 6.5CM Berger was one of the rounds I was hoping to test last year in the Mesa Precison Arms Crux review but, due to the facilities move I will speak about in a moment, didn't end up being feasible then. I'm really excited to see how this performs as I have heard good things.


Lapua 69gr .223rem and Berger 140gr Hybrid 6.5CM from Capstone Precision Group

I think here would be a pretty good place to talk about Capstone Precision group. CPG is a combine of Berger, Lapua, SK, VihtaVuori, and, in a way, Applied Ballistics Munitions which is essentially an abandoned brand name for Berger's loaded ammo products. This is not what I would call the normal story in which somebody gobbles up somebody else, uses their name, and nothing else remain. Berger still has it's people and machines and brought back all of it's operations to where it started in the Phoenix AZ area last year. They also decided to rebrand their Applied Ballistics Munitions line of loaded ammo developed with Bryan Litz (hence the name) to Berger. Moving their operations, or in this case moving them back, is what caused all those disruptions in supply that pretty much everybody noticed last year. The machines are all up and running again now and as evidence I have 10 boxes of 6.5CM Berger cartridges in front of me and see the Berger 6mm bullets that even their sponsored shooters ran low on last year in stock pretty much everywhere online. Similar to the story with Berger, Lapua stuff is still made in Finland with their machines and their people. This means that the people at CPG have two entirely separate state of the art facilities for manufacturing both bullets and loaded ammunition. I am told that this is starting to result in some cross pollination of ideas so I am pretty interested to see what fruit these new relationships will bear in the coming years. I, for one, wouldn't mind if Lapua inspired .22lr production happened to find it's way to the Berger facility. For now though, the most visible result is that Berger ammo is now loaded with Lapua brass which I understand is a change. In the case of the 6.5CM in front of me, this means the higher pressure tolerant small rifle primer that Lapua uses in it's all it's 6.5CM cases as well as some .308 ones.


Berger 140gr Hybrid 6.5CM now using Lapua's small rifle primed cases. BTW, I actually took this pic and it looks professional as hell, must have been an accident.

In other review related stuff. I have been working on the TriggerTech spinoff review. This will be more in depth than the section on TriggerTech in the Mesa Precision Arms review. Part of that will be more focus on their Diamond trigger and part of it will be some talk about the 2-stage versions coming up later this year that we saw some prototypes of at this years SHOT show.

Update 7-15-2019


Testing with the Berger 140gr Hybrid 6.5CM, Mesa Precision Arms Crux, and Athlon Midas TAC scope.

It's been a while since I have done an update on this years reviews but things have been progressing so I'll try to get you all caught up.

Progress of scope reviews:
I recently spoke with Meopta and the Optika6 should be arriving mid August. The one I will have for review will be a 5-30 and will have the reticle ILya recently posted that I have reposted here.  My plan is to try to get as many optics to drop in my lap at that time as possible, especially the ones that are of similar price point. I have not recieved any updates on the timetable for any of the other optics (Zero Comp, Athlon, or Burris) but I have not yet followed up with them either. I will be doing so soon to try to coordinate everything arriving.


Meopta Optika6 5-30x56mm PTM1 MRAD RD Reticle

Progress of the TriggerTech spin-off review:
According to my original plan, this review was going to be done in May I think. Between work, the kids, and finding out I had a lot more I wanted to say than I thought I did, that didn't happen. It is done now, sort of. What is going to happen is that I am first going to post the review and then, in a couple months, it will be updated to include their new 2-stage model. I should have the first installment up very soon now.

Progress on the second round of ammo testing in the Kelbly's Atlas and Mesa Precision Arms Crux rifles:
I've now done the first testing of the Berger and Norma ammo in last years review rifles. The performance was quite good, particularly so for both the Norma and Berger 6.5CM rounds. I'll leave you for now with the image jump of the data. The Kelbly's and Mesa Precision Arms reviews will soon be updated with this fresh ammo data.


Berger 140gr 6.5CM #65-31010 from the Mesa Precision Arms Crux rifle


Norma 130gr 6.5CM Scirocco II #20166302 from the Mesa Precision Arms Crux rifle


Norma USA 77gr SMK #10157502 from the Kelbly's Atlas Tactical rifle


Data table for all ammo tested in the Mesa Precision Arms Crux in 6.5CM


Data table for all ammo tested in the Kelbly's Atlas Tactical in .223rem

Have you had a chance to do any shooting with these at longer distances?

Let me know how you like the Optika6 with my reticle.

ILya
www.darklordofoptics.com

Will do, I should be getting the scope in pretty soon now.

Update 7-30-2019

Both the Kelbly's Atlas Tactical and Mesa Precision Arms Crux rifle reviews have been updated with the data from the new ammo tested in them this year. I think adding these few new rounds has given a better overall perspective on what range of performance to expect from these custom rifles with the limitation of factory ammo. More importantly though, it has given me more data to add to my thoughts on harmonics.
To some extent, obtaining a really accurate rifle / ammo platform is and art rather than science. By this I mean that hypotheses abound but theories (in the scientific rather than laymen's sense of the word) are underdeveloped.  We talk of the effect of jump to the lands on bullet deformation, over twist on jacket deformation, 5 lands vs. 4 on bullet deformation, vibration of the barrel on group dispersion, and curve of the barrel leading to a .22lr round slapping back and forth on its way down. We don't really know the magnitude of the effect of any of these things though or, in some cases, whether they even happen. They are hypotheses to explain data and they usually remain that because to really test them would be quite expensive. In the end, we try a few different bullets, vary the seating depth, and vary the powder charge with maybe a couple different powders and when we get something that works we tell ourselves a story that makes some sense.

One of these under tested hypotheses that has been running around in my head is the idea that most of the time the difference between a really good shooting load / ammo, and a so-so one is simply harmonics. Subconsciously this is probably an appealing idea to me more because of what it would mean if it was than because the data points to it. If the idea is right it means that by changing the harmonics, easy enough with a barrel tuner, a wider variety of ammo / loads could be the right ammo for a rifle. This is important in an era when factory ammo is better and more affordable because, unlike hand loads, there will never be an infinite variety of factory ammo to be the right, custom, fit for your rifle but with a tuner you could fit the rifle to the ammo. Tuners have been used on rimfires for ever but are only starting to be common on center fires because, until recently, there really wasn't any factory ammo worth tuning for.

During the testing of these two rifles I played for the first time with both a magnetospeed chrono and a proof carbon barrel. The magnetospeed has been said to change harmonics and I believe that it did sometimes loosening (Mesa rifle with Hornaday ammo) and sometimes tightening (Kelbly rifle with Lapua) groups. The Proof wrapped barrel has been said to be less harmonically lively than a conventional one. If that is true you would expect it's average group size to be lower even if it's best was no better. This was also the case and I came away thinking that the Proof barrel could be more ammo tolerant than a conventional barrel (I have updated it's sub-section of the Mesa review to reflect this thinking.)

The takeaway from this is that I intend to do some barrel tuning testing over next year to see if I can get more answers on this as well as a plausible range of expectations for shooters.

Update 8-8-2019

I have just posted the TriggerTech triggers spin off review. This includes testing of, and experience with, their Diamond and Primary 700 platform single stage triggers in several different rifles. This review will be updated later on this year with their new two stage Diamond when that is released.


TriggerTech Diamond in it's shiny package

Update 9-4-2019 (Image host server was down so this is posted a bit after written)

It will probably come as no surprise to any of you who have followed the workings of the optics industry to find that the Meopta Optika 6 has been delayed some. This is pretty much par for the course in the industry as a whole. Moving from prototypes to production at scale seems to always take longer than expected. The Burris XTR 3 is, similarly, also delayed. The latest estimate for the Meopta is middle of this month and I don't have an estimate for the XTR 3 at the moment. So the takaway is that neither I, nor the good folks at the optics companies, have forgotten about these reviews. They will happen when the scopes are on hand... Eventually.

Research and interviews with experts on the topic of harmonics have been going quite well. Although I do not think I will have anything finished on the subject until next year, I do think it will be well worth it and of great improvement for the factory ammo shooter as well as some improvement even with handloads.

In preparation for the two stage TriggerTech I will be testing later this year I picked up quality used force gauge. The Haag-Streit Correx ones I used in the TriggerTech and Bix'n Andy reviews were loaners that have gone back. Recently, I was able to acquire a similar quality but very old used Halda Haldex AB gauge for future testing. Of course, different gauges can produce different results because measurement instruments are not perfect and themselves introduce errors. This is especially so in the case of force gauges. As such, I tested the Halda gauge today on some of the same triggers I had used with the Haag-Streit Correx gauges. Indeed, the Haag and Halda results are not interchangeable. The used Halda I bought, which is probably 50 years old, reads slightly more force on the same triggers than that Haag did. For example, the TriggerTech primary bottoms out at 32.62oz on the Haag and 33.30oz on the Halda. I have no idea which gauge is more correct (perhaps I will test with some calibrated weights at some point as this is quite knowable) but they are a little different. The Halda is quite old so most likely it's calibration is the one that is off. More interestingly though, the used Halda shows lower shot to shot variance (lower SD value) on all tested triggers. It is therefore most likely that, despite likely having it's calibration, and therefore accuracy, a little off, the gauge itself is probably a bit more precise. Lastly, the Halda I have acquired does not cover the entire range of the combined two Haag-Streit Correx ones. It's range is 100-1000grams (3.53-35.3oz.) So, some triggers will be able to get lighter than it can read with great accuracy and some presumably heavier than it can read at all. The takeaway is that I will not be stacking numbers from the Halda gauge side by side in the same table with those from the Haag-Streit Correx gauges as the standard deviations on triggers tested with the Halda would look much better than those tested on the Haag-Streit Correx gauges.


Testing how the used Halda gauge measurements compare to those of the previously used Haag-Streit Correx gauges.

Update 9-22-2019

The Harrell's tuner brake arrived yesterday for the factory ammo tuning article. I was a little surprised when my research on tuner brakes brought up only one option which fit both the 5/8"-24 threads, and the larger muzzle sizes of my rifles. Despite the paucity of other choices, I am pleased with the product. Harrell's precision is quite well known in the benchrest community for making very accurate volumetric powder measures (yes, I have wondered for some time if they could prove accurate enough for long range shooting provided a small grain size powder is used but that is a test for another time) and also for their portable reloading presses. At the benchrest matches I have attended virtually everybody uses both of these products. The powder measure and press mount to your bench with a clamp and are therefore easy to take to the range with you to develop loads in an efficient manner. Of course, what we are trying to do in this article is to find out if we can tune factory loads effectively enough to avoid having to do all that load development stuff. The irony of this is delicious.

The Harrell's tuner brake shows the clean, high quality machining I would expect and is generally a pretty nice looking unit. At $90 it also appears to be priced on the benchrest price scale and not the tactical one. Say what you will but the tactical tax is a real thing.


Harrell's tuner brake

There are a few features that the Harrell's tuner brake has that I like and one that is less desirable. The brake uses a jam nut adjustment lock system to secure the adjustable weight collars. This is greatly preferable to me over set screws which require a tool to manipulate, have a greater tendency to come loose, and can bung up the thread they run on if over tightened or not tipped with a soft material. The marking system on the brake for keeping track of your settings is quite well designed. The brake contains markings on the body for each complete revolution. These bear the designations 0,50,100,150 as well as 10 markings on one of the weight collars per revolution. Therefore, a simple single number is produced for each possible setting when the markings are added. For instance, if the reading on the brake is 100, and that of the weight 7, your total setting would be 107. Very easy to record and keep track of. The only major downside I see to the design is that it is radialy symmetric and therefore exhausts gasses in all directions. It is nice that you don't have to index it but you western folks are going to kick up some dust. I'm from Ohio, so for me, this is a case of somebody else's problem.

Since the website lacks some detail on the specifications I'll give you my measurements here:

Total weight 7oz (2.10oz in the movable weights and 2.9oz in the stationary brake.)
Inner diameter of weights .9930" (will only work with barrels with a muzzle smaller than this)
Overall adjustment travel: 15 complete revolutions ~.47"

The next step in the process of this tuning article will be to create a standard operation procedure for tuning and then try it out with the Kelbly .223. Hopefully, the result will be some clear cut improvement in group sizes.

Update 10 9 2019



Experimenting with tuning Lapua factory ammo using the Kelbly's Atlas rifle, Harrell's tuner brake, and Meopta Optika 6 5-30x56 RD FFP scope.

Earlier this week the Meopta Optika 6 5-30x56mm RD FFP scope arrived for review. It arrived the day before I had scheduled to do the barrel tuning testing. Excellent timing on that. As such, I did the tuning testing using the Meopta. I don't yet have much in the way of comments on the scope as I have not had it side by side with anything else or run it though the tracking testing. My biggest thought is that it has a pretty comfortable eyebox for a 30x unit. Comfortable enough that every single through the scope picture came out well. I don't think that has ever happened before.


Through the lens of the new Meopta Optika 6 5-30x56 RD FFP scope

As for the barrel tuning of factory ammo.... Well, I haven't run the numbers on the data yet, but I'm pretty sure the conclusion will be that tuning is not a worthwhile endeavor with factory ammo as the signal to noise ratio is too poor. It felt a bit like chasing ghosts. I should have the whole article put together in a few weeks despite my sadness at the outcome not being what I desired.

Update 10 17 2019

First up, The new, 34mm main tube Midas TAC 5-25x56mm just arrived for this second year of sub $1k long range ffp mil/mil scope reviews. Next week I should be getting a Nikon Black and a Sightron (I think it will be the S-Tac.) These, with the previously mentioned Meopta Optika 6 5-30x56mm should round out the lineup.

The biggest thing about this Midas, vs. the 6-24x I reviewed last year is..... its bigness. It has a 56mm objective vs. the previous 50mm, 34mm tube vs. 30mm, has 32mil of elevation adjustment vs. 25mil, a 5x vs. 4x erector ratio, weighs 30oz vs. 26.3oz, and is 15.4" long vs. 14.6." I suspect that purchasers willing to spend the extra $220 street vs. the 6-24x will be most interested in either the big objective or the greater elevation adjustment. In these respects it represents something of a lower cost Ares ETR option in that it's size and elevation range are similar to that of the ETR but without illumination and with Midas TAC instead of Ares ETR level of glass.

I will be interested, in testing, too see if the extra size objective gives the 5-25x56 any edge in optical performance over the 50mm Midas TAC or Ares BTR's that I reviewed last year.


New, 34mm tube Athlon Midas TAC 5-25x56 with existing, 30mm Midas TAC 6-24x50mm (mounted on my Mesa Precision Arms Crux rifle)

In other news, the factory ammo tuning article should be completed in a few days and I expect I will have it up a week or so after that point.

Update 10-28-2019

First up, I have posted the barrel tuning factory ammo? article. It is an interesting read even if I didn't post a big improvement in group sizes through tuning and it was a well worth the effort involved to gain the knowledge I have gained in the process.

Second, the last of the scopes for the Sub $1k long rang FFP Mil / Mil series started last year arrived this week and I have done a good bit of testing. These last two are a Nikon Black FX1000 6-24x50SF Matte IL FX-MRAD, and a Sightron S-TAC 4-20x50FFPZSIRMH. If you were a little board by the very similar, and generally good, performance of last years scopes, tune in for this years reviews. There is a lot of difference between scopes in this group.


All the sub $1k long range ffp mil / mil optics reviewed this, and last, years

Third, following the optics reviews, I will be doing a review on the new RCBS matchmaster powder measure. This is basically a faster and more accurate (.04gn) version of the popular chargemaster. I'm interested to see how it performs as well as how they choose to price it. At the same time, I will be taking a look at the Matchmaster die set.  I'm especially interested in the bullet window seating die as I have often found it a bit tricky to get bullets to slid into my seating die from the bottom just right so as to minimize run out.

Update 11-7-2019

This years Sub $1k scope reviews are coming along well. You will see the Meopta Optika 6 5-30x56mm at the end of the month followed by the Sightron S-TAC 4-20x50FFPZSIRMH, Athlon Midas TAC 5-25x56, and finally the Nikon Black FX1000 6-24x50SF Matte IL FX-MRAD.

The RCBS matchmaster dies arrived this week. They sent a few more than I expected. They sent one of each set that they have available and this adds up to 3x bullet seating dies, a full length resizer, and a neck resizer. I guess I won't have to be changing any seating die settings to go from one bullet / load to another. At least not for the first 3 work ups.


RCBS matchmaster die set options in .223 rem

What interests me most on these die sets is the bullet window seating die. Getting the bullet seated straight in a conventional die is not just a pain in the ass. It also sometimes comes with a degree of uncertainty because you cannot see the projectile for the last, most important, part of the stroke because it is inside the die. It has been my experience that if the bullet is not pretty close to exactly straight when going in, it often ends up with less than ideal run out. The die is supposed to align things properly, and fully, before substantial force is brought to bear, but that has not proven to be the case with all the dies I have used. This is what initially prompted me to abandon conventional seating dies in favor of  dies that also featured sliding internal sleeves to improve bullet alignment. These RCBS MatchMaster seating dies are one of those featuring sliding internal sleeves.

The way that these seating dies work is that you drop the bullet, tail down, in the die though the window in the top. The bullet falls into the sliding alignment sleeve and comes to rest on the edge of an o-ring that stretches across a little channel in the alignment sleeve to form a stop. The bullet sits quite low in the die, in what is essentially a long tubular alignment section not much larger than the bullet diameter. There is very little play between the bullet and this alignment section. In the picture below you see a fairly long 69gr projectile in the .223rem die. You next raise the case in the press into the bottom of the die where the case fits into the bottom of the sleeve and raises it to the seating stem. The stem and bullet fit though the sleeve and nudge the o-ring aside pushing the bullet into the case. It looks like a slick system which will not result in pinched fingers and will also require less ram stroke distance than seating in competing dies without windows do by a pretty substantial amount. I should last mention that the seating stem is hollow so it won't bottom out on long VLD pills.


69gr bullet dropped down in the RCBS matchmaster seating die

Update 11-15-2019

Meopta Optika6 5-30x56 RD FFP Scope Review is up. Next up will be the Sightron S-TAC 4-20x50FFPZSIRMH, then the Athlon Midas TAC 5-25x56, and lastly the Nikon Black FX1000 6-24x50SF Matte IL FX-MRAD.


How about this for a through the scope picture of the Meopta Optika6 5-30x56 RD FFP Scope

Update 12-18-2019

First off, the Sightron S-TAC 4-20x50FFPZSIRMH review is up. Next up will be the Athlon Midas TAC 5-25x56. That one is actually done and sort of waiting in the hopper as I like to give new reviews a month or so with top billing before dropping the next thing. In light of the rumors of Nikon ceasing to sell rifle scopes, and because the one I was testing proved defective, was returned, and I don't think a replacement is forthcoming, it is unlikely that I will do a full review of the Nikon Black FX1000 6-24x50SF Matte IL FX-MRAD. I will do some sort of summary of how exactly it had issues during the testing in an upcoming post on this thread probably in the next few weeks.


Sightron S-Tac 4-20X50FFPZSIRMH on Kelbly Atlas Tactical with it's Favorite Lapua Ammo

Update 1-14-2020

I have posted the Athlon Midas TAC 5-25x56mm rifle scope review. This will be the last update I do on this thread. I new year has come and I started the 2020 BigJimFish Review and Article blog thread today. Be sure to check out that thread as I have already laid out this years reviews schedule as it stands today including some new stuff.


Athlon Midas TAC 5-25x56 (background on Kelbly's Atlas rifle) with the Midas TAC 6-24x50 (foreground on Mesa Precision Arms Crux rifle)

Any update on the Nikon FX1000 issues?

I'll get around to writing it up one of these days. When I heard Nikon was ceasing to make scopes it sort of became backburner. The areas that had issues were the diopters range of adjustment and some trouble with the erector tube not fully seating on the adjustments under it's own spring tension causing tracking to lag then settle only after recoil. I'll go into more detail when I get a break between other projects. It's not on the top of the priority list.