Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/554642
S P O R T I N G C L A S S I C S 5 0 proprietary equipment in the next room we're not allowed to expose to rabble like you." He didn't really say that rabble part. He was much too polite and professional for that. The simple fact is that Leupold operates under restrictions because of its working relationship with some US government clients, which I assume are military. There are certain procedures and equipment they can't expose to the press. I'm sure there are ordinary consumer optics secrets they hold close to the vest, too. "So a special machine more or less duplicates actual rifle recoil?" "Yes. That makes it easy to duplicate just about any firearm weight and caliber combination you can imagine. It's one thing to say a scope can take so many rides on a .375 H&H, it's another to say on a seven-pound .375 H&H versus an eleven-pounder. Big difference." "So then, how big of a rifle, how much recoil force have you tested on your scopes? I can't imagine anyone scoping a .500 Nitro double rifle, but do you test them? Have you tested one on, say, a .700 Nitro Express?" "The worst real rifle that I've taken energy traces from was not those huge calibers, but a very light, twenty- inch barrel .458 Lott. I can't give the numbers out, but I will say that was not a fun day because I need a minimum of ten traces for an average. That rifle had stock destroying energy—literally. The scope held up just fine, but one of the very best, high-dollar synthetic stocks didn't." "You broke the stock?" "The stock broke." I didn't ask, but I'm guessing Archerd was shooting that rifle while it was mounted in a fixed rest such as a Lead Sled, which are known to break stocks of high-recoil rifles because, unlike the human shoulder, there is no give in a steel cradle anchored by 25 to 50 pounds of lead ballast. What I did remember to ask, because it's commonly accepted in the optics world, was this: "I assume