Rifle Scopes Arken SH4 Gen2 6-24x50 VPR MIL

FuhQ

Unreconstructed
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    *** Alright... Let's try this one more time... Maybe they have gotten it out of their system, and this time folks can be mature about this and act civil, and not accuse people of "shilling", and start hating on what other people spend their own personal money on. ***

    *** I am not sponsored by, shoot for, work for, or affiliated with ANY company or product. I bought this scope with my own money, I paid full-price, and it was NOT "cherry-picked" for me. I own a bunch of different scopes that range from cheap Nikons, fixed & adj. power SWFA SS, Vortex, all the way up to Zeiss and Kahles. ***



    This will be an (ongoing) unbiased review thread... Good or bad, I will post what happens. And I would like other Arken owners to join in, as well.


    About a month ago I bought an Arken SH4 Gen2 6-24x50 VPR MIL scope (as most of you are aware 🙄). It came in about 3 weeks ago. I have now had the chance to spend a fair bit of time with it, and shoot through it on several different occasions at the range, with varying atmospheric and light conditions, on my Rem 700 5R Milspec in .260 Remington.

    *** Overall UNBIASED first impressions with unboxing, mounting, and shooting with it... ***

    1.) I am very impressed with this scope for the money. It's heavy, robust, feels solidly built, and the turrets feel great. They have a very positive feel and are very audible. So far, they repeatedly go back to true-zero every time, even after dialing all the way up and down the ladder several times and re-checking zero. ✅ My one gripe is that it doesn't rotate a full 10 MILs per revolution. It only goes to 8 MILs, so it makes keeping track a bit odd, when you go past 0 to the next rotation. Maybe they can fix this for future models. 🤷🏼 From my 100 yard zero with a 20 MOA base, I have 23.5 MILs of elevation adjustment in the turret. At 100 yards, 1 MRAD is 3.6". That means I have roughly 84.6 inches of useable adjustment from my 100 yard zero. I can crank it the last .5 MILs to get a full 24, but it feels like it's straining the erector, and I don't feel like breaking the damn thing. 23.5 MILs is pretty respectable after setting a 100 yard zero and zero-stop.

    2.) The zero-stop is amazing, I wish more companies had a zero-stop that was this positive and solid. Easy to use, effective, and requires only a 2mm allen bit to reset the turret caps, and tighten down the ZS. I have cranked pretty hard on the elevation turret to see if I can feel any slippage or "give" while the cap screws are tightened down, and so far, they are solid as a rock. ✅

    3.) The HD glass (in my particular scope) is pretty good overall. No image distortion that I can see while looking through it at any magnification setting. And I'd say it's damn-good for a $450 scope. I'm fairly impressed with it. The reticle is nice, too, and the glass-etching is very clean. I don't see any distortion in the reticle, or around the edges of the glass, even at max magnification. ✅

    4.) Parallax adjustment is VERY smooth, and seems to be pretty true on my scope. Everyone's eyes are different, so it might vary slightly and not be 100% on the mark each time, each day, for each distance, but mine is pretty close, maybe 10 yards off or something. If I had to guess, I'd say @ 100 yards, the setting (for my eye) is probably set at around 110 yards for a clear picture. ✅ But, in all-fairness, I've also sustained a lot of damage to my right eye over the years, and the muscles get strained over just a few hours of shooting, and I have problems with maintaining a clear image in every scope I own (price doesn't matter), so there's a very good possibility that it might just be me, and not the scope... 🤷🏼 So, take that part of the review with a grain of salt. Next time I go, I will test it early, so I can find out whether or not it was me, or the scope. I want to be as honest and unbiased as possible. 👍🏼

    5.) My 1 major gripe so far, is the illuminated reticle... It's not very bright, even on level 10. I DO however, like the intermittent off positions between each brightness setting. This is a feature you don't normally see on scopes in this price range.

    Overall, I am very pleased with my purchase. So far, so good. 👍🏼

    I bought this scope because the reviews I saw impressed me, and the features list is pretty packed for a scope in this price range. I like trying new things to see if they're actually worth the money, or how well they hold up. It has nothing to do with "shilling" for any company or product.

    I will do some side-by-side comparisons later on with other brand and model scopes I have, and try to get pictures with my phone (iPhone 11 Pro Max, so its got a decent camera) while looking through them at the same targets, at the same magnification ranges.

    I will keep this thread updated as I venture down this journey with a new scope from a relatively new company. As I hope the rest of you Arken owners will, as well. If something bad happens with your scope, please post it up, and what happened, and how your CS experience goes. Let's have full-transparency here.

    Here's some pictures...

    A1072716-2C96-48C3-8297-45319F3DAEFB.jpeg

    E40D5D31-D181-4A2E-AE62-476932AED7D1.jpeg

    B5E386FD-D17A-4167-A6F5-D12C5651477C.jpeg

    1ED1F2B7-C63C-4C38-8A57-AD6B2CE911AE.jpeg

    73977B6D-C406-4F8C-9C9E-ED90FDDFFA59.jpeg

    7E591F32-42CC-419D-B073-B194FA234A34.jpeg

    7595DA7E-950E-4DD1-BE2F-FA64E07EC181.jpeg

    DBD3E795-48F1-476E-BEF9-C91B5D19A0DB.jpeg

    7D00F9FA-A0B5-4E2D-A67D-E0E66071B4CD.jpeg

    08889B34-1C1B-43CF-AA96-550F02F628A0.jpeg

    4B43B0C7-3191-4E6C-8E0E-04D5FC45D8ED.jpeg

    50B22624-A34B-4791-9BC2-3107C649687C.jpeg


    Here's the 200 yard target @ 6x magnification...

    D29D57FA-1176-4DEF-B2C5-80D9EE0389A6.jpeg


    Here's the 200 yard target @ 14x magnification...

    DF808C49-5218-4FC4-8B28-76B27042254C.jpeg


    Here's the 200 yard target @ 24x magnification...

    76C068B3-D813-46D8-9EB3-34F475C75785.jpeg
     
    Last edited:

    fullsemiauto556

    Sergeant of the Hide
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 1, 2021
    227
    220
    IN
    I told myself I was gonna stay out of these threads, but I genuinely believe my input is helpful and relevant (which is the opposite of what my wife says, lol). I'm not here to promote anything, fight, argue or bicker, really just trying to help give some insight. I apologize to anyone I was rude to in prior discussions. I've become very well aware that optics discussions can get very serious. I'm only an amateur to most people here, so take anything I say with a grain of salt. But, I'm also not an idiot or poor either.

    I now own 3 Arkens total, 2 of those being very recent purchases. One went on my Tippmann 22 rifle and the other replaced my XRSII on my Howa 308. Not because the Arken scope was as good or better than the XRSII, but because I hated the H59 reticle and really like the Arken reticle. It's good enough for what I want to do, which is mainly shooting for groups at 300 yards. I liked the features and the price point.

    That being said, my first scope is unfortunately going back for warranty. I've been chasing my tail for awhile with my 457 trying to figure out issues with group size increase on known good match ammo, strange flyers and issues with groups opening up after scope adjustments, where it needs 5-10 shots to "settle in". Along with the parallax needing to be at 150 for a 75 yard focus, I decided to contact Arken yesterday using their form. I explained my concerns and followed up today with an email to confirm they received the form. I later received a very polite & personal email with a pre-paid return shipping label to send the scope back to them.

    My 2 new scopes seem to be fine so far and the parallax is accurate. All 3 scopes had the diopter adjusted correctly. The weird thing is that all 3 scopes have correct adjustment at 300 yards, but that first scope needs the 150 at 75 for some reason. I noticed the anodizing is a darker shade on the first scope, the serial number is lower and has a different logo style than the 2 new ones. So maybe it's just an early production issue? I swear the newer scopes have a better feeling detent on the turrets when dialing as well, might just be me. I did notice the one new scope has a tight spot in the windage, but seems to have loosened up a bit with play and is not unusable or a concern at this time.

    I also did a tracking test today using a rig I made clamped to my heavy dinner table (don't tell my wife...). I didn't have a leveled/sized target placed at 100 yards or anything, but I did have an aiming point at 75 yards to use for reference. I got the idea from this thread: https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/simple-tracking-test-thoughts.7085642/

    What I found was the first scope (XXXX4184) needed 12.2 mil of adjustment to get 12 mil on the reticle, so 98.3% of actual. The 2 newer scopes (XXXX6756 & 6758) needed 12.1 mil to get 12 mil on the reticle, so 99.1% of actual. I also checked windage and all 3 seem to need an extra 0.05 mil at 6 mil (which you can't do because each click is 0.1 mil). So 99.1% of actual. According to a tracking test I read about on here, 98% is considered good still.

    I also did the nipple twister thing to the scopes along with the above testing and each scope returned to zero every time. I should probably do a live fire tracking test at the range. This is not something I've done before, still new to some of this stuff, past experience I just sighted in a scope at whatever distance I shot at and called it good. I've only recently cared about shooting past 100 yards and worried about dialing elevation, etc. Learn something new every range trip.

    20211012_131421.jpg
     
    Last edited:

    ma smith

    Supporter
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Sep 29, 2020
    1,335
    866
    xxx
     
    Last edited by a moderator:

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    I told myself I was gonna stay out of these threads, but I genuinely believe my input is helpful and relevant (which is the opposite of what my wife says, lol). I'm not here to promote anything, fight, argue or bicker, really just trying to help give some insight. I apologize to anyone I was rude to in prior discussions. I've become very well aware that optics discussions can get very serious. I'm only an amateur to most people here, so take anything I say with a grain of salt. But, I'm also not an idiot or poor either.

    I now own 3 Arkens total, 2 of those being very recent purchases. One went on my Tippmann 22 rifle and the other replaced my XRSII on my Howa 308. Not because the Arken scope was as good or better than the XRSII, but because I hated the H59 reticle and really like the Arken reticle. It's good enough for what I want to do, which is mainly shooting for groups at 300 yards. I liked the features and the price point.

    That being said, my first scope is unfortunately going back for warranty. I've been chasing my tail for awhile with my 457 trying to figure out issues with group size increase on known good match ammo, strange flyers and issues with groups opening up after scope adjustments, where it needs 5-10 shots to "settle in". Along with the parallax needing to be at 150 for a 75 yard focus, I decided to contact Arken yesterday using their form. I explained my concerns and followed up today with an email to confirm they received the form. I later received a very polite & personal email with a pre-paid return shipping label to send the scope back to them.

    My 2 new scopes seem to be fine so far and the parallax is accurate. All 3 scopes had the diopter adjusted correctly. The weird thing is that all 3 scopes have correct adjustment at 300 yards, but that first scope needs the 150 at 75 for some reason. I noticed the anodizing is a darker shade on the first scope, the serial number is lower and has a different logo style than the 2 new ones. So maybe it's just an early production issue? I swear the newer scopes have a better feeling detent on the turrets when dialing as well, might just be me. I did notice the one new scope has a tight spot in the windage, but seems to have loosened up a bit with play and is not unusable or a concern at this time.

    I also did a tracking test today using a rig I made clamped to my heavy dinner table (don't tell my wife...). I didn't have a leveled/sized target placed at 100 yards or anything, but I did have an aiming point at 75 yards to use for reference. I got the idea from this thread: https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/simple-tracking-test-thoughts.7085642/

    What I found was the first scope (XXXX4184) needed 12.2 mil of adjustment to get 12 mil on the reticle, so 98.3% of actual. The 2 newer scopes (XXXX6756 & 6758) needed 12.1 mil to get 12 mil on the reticle, so 99.1% of actual. I also checked windage and all 3 seem to need an extra 0.05 mil at 6 mil (which you can't do because each click is 0.1 mil). So 99.1% of actual. According to a tracking test I read about on here, 98% is considered good still.

    I also did the nipple twister thing to the scopes along with the above testing and each scope returned to zero every time. I should probably do a live fire tracking test at the range. This is not something I've done before, still new to some of this stuff, past experience I just sighted in a scope at whatever distance I shot at and called it good. I've only recently cared about shooting past 100 yards and worried about dialing elevation, etc. Learn something new every range trip.

    View attachment 7720653
    That's good to know that their CS was on-pointe, because of the horror stories we all heard about in the other threads. That gives me hope Arken is stepping up their game in that department, incase I ever have an issue. 👍🏼
     

    fuzzytek

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Aug 15, 2009
    109
    7
    51
    NY
    I told myself I was gonna stay out of these threads, but I genuinely believe my input is helpful and relevant (which is the opposite of what my wife says, lol). I'm not here to promote anything, fight, argue or bicker, really just trying to help give some insight. I apologize to anyone I was rude to in prior discussions. I've become very well aware that optics discussions can get very serious. I'm only an amateur to most people here, so take anything I say with a grain of salt. But, I'm also not an idiot or poor either.

    I now own 3 Arkens total, 2 of those being very recent purchases. One went on my Tippmann 22 rifle and the other replaced my XRSII on my Howa 308. Not because the Arken scope was as good or better than the XRSII, but because I hated the H59 reticle and really like the Arken reticle. It's good enough for what I want to do, which is mainly shooting for groups at 300 yards. I liked the features and the price point.

    That being said, my first scope is unfortunately going back for warranty. I've been chasing my tail for awhile with my 457 trying to figure out issues with group size increase on known good match ammo, strange flyers and issues with groups opening up after scope adjustments, where it needs 5-10 shots to "settle in". Along with the parallax needing to be at 150 for a 75 yard focus, I decided to contact Arken yesterday using their form. I explained my concerns and followed up today with an email to confirm they received the form. I later received a very polite & personal email with a pre-paid return shipping label to send the scope back to them.

    My 2 new scopes seem to be fine so far and the parallax is accurate. All 3 scopes had the diopter adjusted correctly. The weird thing is that all 3 scopes have correct adjustment at 300 yards, but that first scope needs the 150 at 75 for some reason. I noticed the anodizing is a darker shade on the first scope, the serial number is lower and has a different logo style than the 2 new ones. So maybe it's just an early production issue? I swear the newer scopes have a better feeling detent on the turrets when dialing as well, might just be me. I did notice the one new scope has a tight spot in the windage, but seems to have loosened up a bit with play and is not unusable or a concern at this time.

    I also did a tracking test today using a rig I made clamped to my heavy dinner table (don't tell my wife...). I didn't have a leveled/sized target placed at 100 yards or anything, but I did have an aiming point at 75 yards to use for reference. I got the idea from this thread: https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/simple-tracking-test-thoughts.7085642/

    What I found was the first scope (XXXX4184) needed 12.2 mil of adjustment to get 12 mil on the reticle, so 98.3% of actual. The 2 newer scopes (XXXX6756 & 6758) needed 12.1 mil to get 12 mil on the reticle, so 99.1% of actual. I also checked windage and all 3 seem to need an extra 0.05 mil at 6 mil (which you can't do because each click is 0.1 mil). So 99.1% of actual. According to a tracking test I read about on here, 98% is considered good still.

    I also did the nipple twister thing to the scopes along with the above testing and each scope returned to zero every time. I should probably do a live fire tracking test at the range. This is not something I've done before, still new to some of this stuff, past experience I just sighted in a scope at whatever distance I shot at and called it good. I've only recently cared about shooting past 100 yards and worried about dialing elevation, etc. Learn something new every range trip.

    View attachment 7720653
    Is the middle scope using the one piece mount?
     

    fuzzytek

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Aug 15, 2009
    109
    7
    51
    NY
    I will be buying the same scope within the next month. I read somewhere that the Arken rings really don't hold scope well and need major lapping. Would you recommend better rings?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: FuhQ

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    I will be buying the same scope within the next month. I read somewhere that the Arken rings really don't hold scope well and need major lapping. Would you recommend better rings?
    So far mine have been excellent. I was surprised for a $60 set of rings. But so far, so good. They're holding zero, and staying tight on the rail. I did use slightly higher torque specs than what they recommend... I used 20 in. lbs. on the ring caps, and 40 in. lbs. on the base clamp. Solid as a rock, so far. 👍🏼

    These days, with easily accessible high-quality machining and CNC's... Usually you only have to lap rings when you use cheap shitty rings, or a cheap shitty base, or a 2-peice mount that isn't 100% square. This is why I use EGW HD bases. Never had an issue.
     

    fuzzytek

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Aug 15, 2009
    109
    7
    51
    NY
    So far mine have been excellent. Usually rings only need lapping when you use a shitty base (or a 2-peice mount) that isn't 100% square. This is why I use EGW HD bases. Never had an issue.
    That's good to hear. Rifle it's going on is a Remmy 700P in 300RUM that came with a Nightforce 40moa one piece base.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: FuhQ

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    That's good to hear. Rifle it's going on is a Remmy 700P in 300RUM that came with a Nightforce 40moa one piece base.
    I will be interested to hear how it holds up on the RUM. I have a couple of 7mm STW's and a custom .300 Ackley (blown-out .300 Weatherby), that put down some hefty recoil as well. I'm running Vortex HS-T 6-24x50's on them, and they're holding up. But if the Arken can handle it, the extra MIL adjustment and 34mm tube might end up getting a couple of those HS-T's replaced... 😂
     
    • Like
    Reactions: fuzzytek

    fuzzytek

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Aug 15, 2009
    109
    7
    51
    NY
    I will be interested to hear how it holds up on the RUM. I have a couple of 7mm STW's and a custom .300 Ackley (blown-out .300 Weatherby), that put down some hefty recoil as well. I'm running Vortex HS-T 6-24x50's on them, and they're holding up. But if the Arken can handle it, the extra MIL adjustment and 34mm tube might end up getting a couple of those HS-T's replaced... 😂
    I posted the question of it's survival on one of the zuck groups and response was positive. A couple of people mentioned surviving larger calibers. We'll see.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: FuhQ

    fullsemiauto556

    Sergeant of the Hide
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 1, 2021
    227
    220
    IN
    Is the middle scope using the one piece mount?

    Yes, one piece mount.

    I will be buying the same scope within the next month. I read somewhere that the Arken rings really don't hold scope well and need major lapping. Would you recommend better rings?

    I've never lapped scope rings personally. The rings seem well made and held up to my .308 bolt gun just fine using 15 in/lbs of torque on the caps. The only thing I've noticed with the one piece mount is the rear ring gap is noticeably larger than the front, but researching pictures of it installed show the same as mine, so I think it's just the way they're made. It installed with no issues.

    20210929_214228.jpg
     
    • Like
    Reactions: DubfromGA and FuhQ

    Gohring65

    Defective insubordinate & Fry Cook
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 13, 2017
    1,265
    1,020
    Ohio
    So far mine have been excellent. I was surprised for a $60 set of rings. But so far, so good. They're holding zero, and staying tight on the rail. I did use slightly higher torque specs than what they recommend... I used 20 in. lbs. on the ring caps, and 40 in. lbs. on the base clamp. Solid as a rock, so far. 👍🏼

    These days, with easily accessible high-quality machining and CNC's... Usually you only have to lap rings when you use cheap shitty rings, or a cheap shitty base, or a 2-peice mount that isn't 100% square. This is why I use EGW HD bases. Never had an issue.
    Is the gap between the ring cap and saddle closed when tight to spec or close to it? I have a set and there was no gap when I tighten to spec.
     

    fullsemiauto556

    Sergeant of the Hide
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 1, 2021
    227
    220
    IN
    Is the gap between the ring cap and saddle closed when tight to spec or close to it? I have a set and there was no gap when I tighten to spec.
    Both sets of my fixed rings had a very small gap when torqued to 15 in/lbs. I can see light through them, but just barely.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: FuhQ

    Gohring65

    Defective insubordinate & Fry Cook
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 13, 2017
    1,265
    1,020
    Ohio
    Both sets of my fixed rings had a very small gap when torqued to 15 in/lbs. I can see light through them, but just barely.
    That’s about how mine were, I don’t see that ever and I was worried about specs.
    I did snap one of the anchor plates last week on the Arken rings. I emailed Arken and they had me a confirmation of replacement, I’m not sure but I think they are sending me a whole new set of rings, I only asked for a few of the plates to replace the one I broke. They snail mailed it to me, I’ll get them Saturday, if true, I think that’s outstanding service and dumb business at the same time. Lol
    18CA9C45-B2DA-44D0-8AF0-26C447E19323.jpeg
     
    Last edited:
    • Haha
    • Like
    Reactions: DubfromGA and FuhQ

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    Is the gap between the ring cap and saddle closed when tight to spec or close to it? I have a set and there was no gap when I tighten to spec.
    Mine have virtually no gap when torqued, as well. That was one of the things I like a lot about the Halo rings. 👍🏼 Some folks might not like that, but I do. IMO, it means they were machined to pretty tight tolerances to fit the 34mm tube’s OD, and shouldn’t allow you to over-torque to the point of damaging the scope, tube, or internal lenses. Kind of an “idiot-proof” design feature. Kind of genius if you think about it.

    Personally, I’m not a fan of them writing the torque specs in white lettering on everything, but I totally get it. When I worked at the gun store, I replaced TONS of scopes from people installing them at home, not having a clue what they were doing, and crushing the tubes, or cracking internal lenses… Luckily most of the scopes were cheap POS’s, but we did occasionally send back a Leopold VX-4, VX-5, or Swarovski from someone doing that. 😬

    Like I said, having dealt A LOT with the average DIY gun owner, I think the design feature of super-close machining tolerances on the rings is a great feature. It should certainly help prevent a ton of warranty replacements from crushed tubes and damaged internals. 👍🏼
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Gohring65

    Gohring65

    Defective insubordinate & Fry Cook
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 13, 2017
    1,265
    1,020
    Ohio
    Mine have virtually no gap when torqued, as well. That was one of the things I like a lot about the Halo rings. 👍🏼 Some folks might not like that, but I do. It means they were machine to pretty tight tolerances to fit the 34mm tube’s OD, and shouldn’t allow you to over-torque to the point of damaging the scope, tube, or internal lenses. Kind of an “idiot-proof” design feature.
    They seemed to be pretty nice, I had them on a lapua, I never had a problem until I did some switching around scopes, I know i probably didn’t have the plate squared up and I had a gap to allow it to snap. I am worried that it was virtually effortless to snap it, I barely got them snugged, no where near torque spec.
     

    fullsemiauto556

    Sergeant of the Hide
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 1, 2021
    227
    220
    IN
    On the other end, I didn't care for a set of EGW Keystone rings that had because of too large a ring gap.
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    They seemed to be pretty nice, I had them on a lapua, I never had a problem until I did some switching around scopes, I know i probably didn’t have the plate squared up and I had a gap to allow it to snap. I am worried that it was virtually effortless to snap it, I barely got them snugged, no where near torque spec.
    Hmmmm…🤔 I saw that they were 7075 T6 aluminum, just like my Seekins Precision rings, which require 50-55 in/lbs, and to me, 30 seemed a bit low (just my humble opinion) for base clamp screws. so I went to the top on the first install @ 55, then realized that might be a bit excessive since they’re mount plates aren’t quite as robust as the Seekins rings, so I loosened them up, and went to 40 in/lbs. So far, so good on mine. 👍🏼
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    On the other end, I didn't care for a set of EGW Keystone rings that had because of too large a ring gap.
    I used to use TPS TRW rings (and still have a couple sets left). Good rings, but the mounting clamp was kind of janky, so I didn't use them on anything that recoils very hard. I'm sure I'll upgrade those rifles to Seekins rings one day. I've also found that I am not a fan of rings that use a stud and a nut to mount them to the rail. I like recessed cap screws (like the Seekins & Arken rings) that give a smooth clean look without anything to get knocked loose, or catch on everything while you're walking with it.
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    With my current Berger 153.5 LR Hybrid load in my .260 Rem, and my SH4 retaining 23.5 MILs of elevation travel after setting my 100 yard zero & ZS… My dope chart says I still have enough range to dial to 1,675 yards, without using any of the reticle. And I only need to use about 3 MILs extra on the reticle to hit 1 mile (1,760 yards). I’m pretty satisfied with that result. The windage is just set as a random 5 MPH @ 90º angle just for effect. I would set the actual wind in the field, of course.

    B18E5545-ECFC-4507-ACC6-CAF06C9DB94B.jpegCDF93341-18AE-4AAD-A7F0-B339E6F42218.jpeg896EC8BA-8FB8-43EC-A42F-36B7DA0C01F0.jpeg

    Here's the reticle animation in Strelok using the actual Arken VPR reticle. Incase anyone is wondering, they DO have it in their database now. 👍🏼

    87EB6860-6FDE-4CBF-9674-CA632BA79C81.jpeg
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: buggz

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    No work on the job site today, and the range is open, so I'll probably go the range here in a little bit... It's a nice day, great weather, and sunny. It would be a good day to do some photo lens image comparisons between scope brands. 👍🏼
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    Went for a few hours this afternoon... Didn't get a whole lot of time behind the Arken, but enough to determine that my parallax adjusting IS most-likely my right eye acting up. Fresh behind the glass I had no issues. But a couple hours later, it was getting blurry again, requiring more adjustment. And when I set it first-thing when I got there, at the 100 yard setting, the parallax at 100 was pretty much dead-ass on.

    So, overall, I'm thinking the parallax is my eyes acting up. Which means, that's another positive ✅ for Arken.

    The lighting conditions this afternoon were pretty good at first, and the scope was VERY clear and bright. But another guy was shooting at the 100/200 and wouldn't shut up, so I didn't get to pull the trigger much, and the ambient lighting outside started deteriorating early (Fall weather), and so did the scope view (just like most any scope would), so I didn't get to take any comparison pics through the glass.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Gohring65

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    I was going to go again today, but got a call late last night, so looks like I'm going out of town to watch football tonight, but hoping to go back to the range tomorrow... We'll see how it goes. 👍🏼
     

    fullsemiauto556

    Sergeant of the Hide
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 1, 2021
    227
    220
    IN
    Just ordered my 4th Arken from Snyder Precision....I guess this means I'm invested now? 🤷‍♂️

    I do like that this standardizes my optics across my rifles set up for precision/group shooting. A semi auto 22, a bolt action 22, a semi auto 5.56 and a .308 bolt action. All the same scope, controls and reticle.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: FuhQ

    NCRSniper

    Private
    Minuteman
    Oct 17, 2021
    1
    0
    Houston, Tx
    How would you compare it so far to the SWFA SS?

    Got a Savage 110 Tactical and I'm thinking to get either this Arken or an SWFA SS 10x.
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    How would you compare it so far to the SWFA SS?

    Got a Savage 110 Tactical and I'm thinking to get either this Arken or an SWFA SS 10x.
    I have 3 SWFA SS scopes, and they are great scopes (I don't plan on selling them anytime soon), but honestly, the Arken is lightyears ahead of them.

    Get the Arken, and their 0.92" 34mm rings. And an Evolution Gun Works 20 MOA rail, and you'll be set. 👍🏼
     
    • Like
    Reactions: NCRSniper

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    Went to the range this afternoon… Tried to take some better pictures...But I'm still not happy with them. I need a better camera system for this. One thing I have noticed when shooting them back-to-back, is that the Arken is noticeably brighter, has a sharper image, and a much wider FOV at all magnification ranges.

    However, here's what I got so far. Here’s my Vortex Viper HS-T vs. the Arken SH4 aimed at the 200 yard target.


    Vortex Viper HS-T @ 6x

    A7E62CF0-BBC6-4192-B539-C1E95DFAE2F5.jpeg


    Vortex Viper HS-T @ 14x

    72367509-3DE4-4437-B8C4-F8763E19656F.jpeg


    Vortex Viper HS-T @ 24x

    E832CD6E-0209-4181-A8F4-2F1C2839A4B5.jpeg


    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Arken SH4 Gen2 @ 6x

    92649D1A-79BD-4F88-A50B-27619D5557E6.jpeg


    Arken SH4 Gen2 @ 14x (sorry for the blurry picture, my iPhone camera was acting stupid and wouldn't focus for this one)

    23606E65-0483-463C-84CD-82D8FF7EEBD7.jpeg


    Arken SH4 Gen2 @ 24x

    77F5C375-DA00-4312-884C-A0948EA2910D.jpeg
     
    Last edited:

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    I can't wait to compare it to my new Strike Eagle 5-25x56 FFP when it comes in. Should be here tomorrow, but I probably won't be able to get to the range until next weekend (depends on how my work schedule goes).
     

    6.5SH

    Old Salt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jul 24, 2020
    3,809
    5,792
    I'd suggest the 1.26" rings if you intend to use the sunshade and their flip up caps.

    No way are they fitting on a T1x with 30 MOA rail and the .92" low rings.
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    I'd suggest the 1.26" rings if you intend to use the sunshade and their flip up caps.

    No way are they fitting on a T1x with 30 MOA rail and the .92" low rings.
    I think you're in the wrong thread... Nobody is running a Tikka T1x in here...

    If you're referring to @NCRSniper post, then he said he has a Savage 110 Tactical (centerfire) rifle.
     

    6.5SH

    Old Salt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jul 24, 2020
    3,809
    5,792
    My point is; isn't a huge barrel and .92" is damn low with 34mm rings and a 50mm objective. Is an Arken thread and what I have on a T1x with their .92" rings...
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    My point is; isn't a huge barrel and .92" is damn low with 34mm rings and a 50mm objective. Is an Arken thread and what I have on a T1x with their .92" rings...
    Maybe try wording things differently...

    But, I have no idea about a Tikka T1x. As you can see in my pictures, the amount of clearance I have with mine, on a Rem 700 w/ a 20 MOA base, and .92" 34mm rings. That barrel's profile is 5R Milspec/Sendero profile. So typical of a heavy barrel rifle.

    I have no idea about how it would fit on your particular rifle with a 30 MOA rail, but I know that with a sunshade and butler creek caps on my Vortex Viper HS-T 6-24x50 it works just fine on my Christensen Arms Ranger 22 with a 20 MOA rail.
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    The new replacement Vortex scope arrived today… They allowed me to upgrade my discontinued model scope to the new Strike Eagle FFP with the EBR-7C MRAD reticle for a small fee...Which I was perfectly ok with, because it allowed me to upgrade to a new production model scope with useable features (for me).

    So far, I’m equally impressed with it, as I was with the Arken, just based on my unboxing first impressions, and messing around with it, and learning how it works, and how to reset the turrets and how the RevStop works, etc... I can tell this is going to be a good scope. The glass is VERY clear, the parallax goes down to 15 yards, which allows me to focus on things inside my house when doing a rough bore-sighting (AR mounted for now, so I couldn't use my actual bore-sighting tools).

    The glass is pretty clear (from what I can tell inside my house). The reticle also seems pretty crisp.

    The turrets are very solid, but the clicks are a lot smaller than the Arken, and not quite as audible, but they do feel very precise and accurate. The elevation turret also is a full 10 MILs per revolution, which is easy to keep up with. I also really like the locking turrets for both windage and elevation. That will be a very nice feature not having to worry about them getting bumped around during transport or hunting.

    The magnification ring is SUPER smooth, and runs exactly 180º (1/2-turn). 5x is in the exact same spot as 25x, just on opposite sides (I figured this out when I installed the throw-lever). Pretty cool find.

    The parallax adjustment is also super smooth, and goes down to 15 yards, and seems pretty accurate inside the house. We'll test more at different ranges at the range this weekend.

    So far, I have high-hopes. I think it will be a solid competitor to the Arken, and both should serve my purposes well. I will probably get more of each in the future.

    DD8F0A1B-4866-463B-8093-9946D4CC6487.jpeg

    D67F2D9E-46F5-4DE6-AD8D-C1B9F7AFA2A8.jpeg

    39C6483E-A39C-4B42-8F87-D85006378282.jpeg

    32BB3383-EDD0-41E0-91B4-3EE313B2A214.jpeg

    C3C24504-2809-47AA-A592-98DF6CFA0A60.jpeg

    A39F044D-CCE6-4255-B323-5EDE0C53C2A9.jpeg

    B7C30403-9135-47C6-991F-7791403B150E.jpeg

    5A8E6408-8AA0-4D5D-B3EF-5D5EB4983798.jpeg

    EE4061CA-D668-48E5-B38B-ECA871D767ED.jpeg


    Mounted up and ready for zero… For now, she's sitting on my custom 24" 6.5 Grendel because the only 34mm mount I had, was the spare Arken 34mm 20 MOA 1-piece mount that I ordered with my Arken scope, incase I wanted to mount it on an AR in the future. But, I did just order a set of Seekins Precision 34mm 0.92" rings, so I can mount it on a bolt-action in the future. More to come. 👍🏼

    1495A4A2-34C3-4AFA-8FBD-7655227C6E7A.jpeg

    C2D7B825-4F4D-4646-A012-D63F9FAE6BF5.jpeg

    0DD6B5BA-94C4-47F9-A3A3-282545F6AC74.jpeg

    3178F7B5-B40B-49E5-AAC1-95779C4D30AF.jpeg
     
    Last edited:

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    I think this was transparent and fair... They admitted it was the first test like this they've ever done. And they admitted that their prior tests could have caused something that led to the failure. I hope they do more scope torture tests in the future. I hope this leads Arken to improve their product to be as rugged as it can be.

     

    jLorenzo

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 20, 2017
    1,073
    178
    Can anyone who has both the 6x24 and 4x16 compare the size and weight? I went with the 6x24 because with a 50mm objective why not have the extra magnification but am Interested in the 4x16, but if they feel almost the same size there isnt much point for me.
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    Can anyone who has both the 6x24 and 4x16 compare the size and weight? I went with the 6x24 because with a 50mm objective why not have the extra magnification but am Interested in the 4x16, but if they feel almost the same size there isnt much point for me.
    It's on their website... But I agree, I don't really have a need for a 4-16x... That's why most all my scopes are 5-25x or 6-24x magnification.

    I screen-shot them for you...

    Here's the 4-16x50...

    SH4 4-16x50.png


    Here's the 6-24x50...

    SH4 6-24x50.png
     

    r.tenorio671

    Private
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 19, 2017
    638
    481
    13° 28' 0" N / 144° 46' 59" E
    ....I personally like the concept behind their testing, to assist manufacturers product improvement processes (y) Will it mean manufacturers will offer free product updates to those with the products that were purchased before the "improvement" was identified? ...one can hope so ;)

    ....curious to see what other brands this will be conducted with.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: FuhQ

    jLorenzo

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 20, 2017
    1,073
    178
    Can anyone who has both the 6x24 and 4x16 compare the size and weight? I went with the 6x24 because with a 50mm objective why not have the extra magnification but am Interested in the 4x16, but if they feel almost the same size there isnt much point for me.
    It's on their website... But I agree, I don't really have a need for a 4-16x... That's why most all my scopes are 5-25x or 6-24x magnification.

    I screen-shot them for you...

    Here's the 4-16x50...

    View attachment 7724958

    Here's the 6-24x50...

    View attachment 7724959
    I saw that they are essentially the same, I would be into a 4x16 (3x18 is better though IMO) if it had a <44mm objective. Theres a niche for a smaller footprint scope in the 4x16-3x18x42mm scope like the NF ATACR but in the Arken price range. I just bought a Athlon Ares ETR 3x18x50 which is one of my favorites scopes now. The reticle is perfect for me.
     

    rangerlong

    Sergeant of the Hide
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 21, 2018
    294
    243
    After @FuhQ’s other thread, and lots of discussion on here, I decided to find out for myself.

    I ordered the 4-16. I think they got it out the same day, so I was impressed with how fast they shipped it.
    I ordered the AR mount, scope caps, and the precision pack with it.
    Initial impressions were good. I liked the fit and finish, and turret feel. The zero stop is great too. I do think overall it’s better than any other scope I’ve tried in this price range.
    Certainly better than the Diamondback Tactical FFP. Very disappointed in those.

    I did notice some issues.
    I had the same issue with the differing gaps in the front and rear rings on the mount.
    My turret markings line up exactly at 0-2 mils, but from 3-6 mils they’re slightly off, then line up again at 7-8 mils.

    I was at the range from 8am-10:30am or so, facing East Southeast. It may have been the changing sun position, but it seemed like every time I switched rifles back to the one with the arken I had to fiddle with the parallax knob to refocus it at 100 yards.

    In the other thread it was being thrown around that the glass was PST II quality. I don’t think so. I had a 3-15 PST II on another rifle. In clear and sunny conditions there wasn’t much of a difference.
    At my range though the 500 yard targets are under trees in a shady area. Looking from the sunny shooting line into the shadows at 500 yards it was noticably easier to see the beat up unpainted steel with the PST II than with the SH4. With the SH4 they kinda blended in to the shadows.
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    After @FuhQ’s other thread, and lots of discussion on here, I decided to find out for myself.

    I ordered the 4-16. I think they got it out the same day, so I was impressed with how fast they shipped it.
    I ordered the AR mount, scope caps, and the precision pack with it.
    Initial impressions were good. I liked the fit and finish, and turret feel. The zero stop is great too. I do think overall it’s better than any other scope I’ve tried in this price range.
    Certainly better than the Diamondback Tactical FFP. Very disappointed in those.

    I did notice some issues.
    I had the same issue with the differing gaps in the front and rear rings on the mount.
    My turret markings line up exactly at 0-2 mils, but from 3-6 mils they’re slightly off, then line up again at 7-8 mils.

    I was at the range from 8am-10:30am or so, facing East Southeast. It may have been the changing sun position, but it seemed like every time I switched rifles back to the one with the arken I had to fiddle with the parallax knob to refocus it at 100 yards.

    In the other thread it was being thrown around that the glass was PST II quality. I don’t think so. I had a 3-15 PST II on another rifle. In clear and sunny conditions there wasn’t much of a difference.
    At my range though the 500 yard targets are under trees in a shady area. Looking from the sunny shooting line into the shadows at 500 yards it was noticably easier to see the beat up unpainted steel with the PST II than with the SH4. With the SH4 they kinda blended in to the shadows.
    I appreciate the unbiased and honest opinions and review. Thanks for sharing! Keep us updated here on the thread, as your time with it increases. 👍🏼

    I agree, it's definitely not perfect, and there are a few things they need to work on (like the Parallax and the glass being slightly dark when the sun is not ideal)... But... It's easily the best (and most feature-packed) $450 scope I've ever owned. 👍🏼

    I hope to order one of the EP4 scopes (with the Japanese ED glass) when they come back in stock. I'd love to do a side-by-side comparison between the HD (SH4) and ED (EP4) glass in the scopes. The 2 optics seem mostly identical, otherwise. I do like the fact that the EP4 has 10 MILs per revolution, compared to the SH4 at 8 MILs per rev.

    It would be really cool if they put the ED glass in the SH4 line, and then put something even higher in the EP4 model scopes, something that's actually really high quality to really compete with the big brands. Because they seem to have most of the rest of the scope figured out (from my experience with mine), outside of the glass and parallax. I haven't noticed any of the markings on the turret being off-center, but I'll look next time I get it out of the safe.
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    Finally cracked the code on Butler Creek flip-caps on the Arken SH4 Gen2 6-24x50… There is NO info about this anywhere on the internet. I have spent hours googling it. Nothing…Nada…Zip…Zilch…Kaput…Nil.

    So, after a lot of trial and error, purchasing multiple (wrong size) caps, and measuring with the calipers, and having to pretty much force it on the objective, the 50mm end accepts a Size #43 cap (Same as the Vortex Viper series 50mm scopes). It does require some force, but the next size up (44) doesn’t even fit on there, it’s WAY too big…It has wiggle-room.

    So if you don’t mind stretching it over the end with a little bit of force, and then pushing it all the way down into place over the sunshade, the #43 is it. 👍🏼 It’s tight, and wont even budge, so you don’t have to worry about it falling off.

    As for the eyepiece, it took some T&E as well… But a Size # 18 fits it like a glove! 👍🏼

    Pictures for proof.

    7392C279-4CCE-44BE-AEB5-B201EA5C7C82.jpeg

    C17BE7EC-32D4-4DEF-A3B8-B016DD4A4F3C.jpeg

    EAE66564-CE0F-4B46-B24C-67C499642BAB.jpeg
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    I decided to pull the Strike Eagle off the 6.5 Grendel, as I don’t shoot that rifle much, because I want to rebuild it with a different (shorter) barrel for hunting suppressed.

    Anyway, I think the new Strike Eagle 5-25x56 might have found it’s permanent home now… I might go confirm zero tomorrow, if the contractor doesn’t do any work. 👍🏼

    And yes, I know it’s not threaded, and yes, it sucks, and yes I will be getting it threaded soon. 😂 I bought it almost 12 years ago before they were offered with factory threads. This thing just flat shoots. It regularly shoots sub-1/4 MOA groups, if I do my part…

    This is my 10th Anniversary Edition (Gen 1) R700 5R Milspec 24” .308 Win. Wearing an EGW HD 20 MOA base, Vortex (Seekins) Prdcision 34mm (0.92” low) rings, and the new Strike Eagle 5-25x56.

    39177D5E-055D-4337-A4AA-C461B2BAB245.jpeg

    6CED526B-E1CE-4062-B319-FA41D690F4E6.jpeg
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: buggz

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    Well... The contractor fucked my plans for today, and I'm still pissed at them for being a bunch of incompetents. But it is what it is. 😡

    I guess I'll be going to the range either tomorrow and Sunday, but definitely Sunday at the minimum. We got a 6pm game tomorrow night, so probably both days...
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    Thinking about going ot the range here in a bit to zero the new SE on the .308, and get some pics through them to compare the SE, Arken SH4, and HS-T on my CA Ranger 22.
     

    FuhQ

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Aug 26, 2013
    3,212
    2,400
    Your Wife's Pussy
    Alright… So, Went to the range today. Got some more pics through the scopes. Hopefully these are better. I took them all back-to-back, so, Same time of day, same conditions, same shadows, same glare, same 200 yard target, same magnifications, same everything.

    Just FYI… All scope pictures go 6x, 16x, 24x magnification.

    First up, the Arken SH4 Gen2 6-24x50 VPR MIL

    6x

    FAAA2499-33FE-4E31-BDD8-8B76ACDD4959.jpeg


    16x

    60362119-066D-4FC6-A0B0-2A9EC39ABD89.jpeg


    24x

    7A52B517-727E-4825-AD56-F20130BF9294.jpeg

    _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Vortex Strike Eagle 5-25x56 EBR-7C MIL

    6x

    27712D2C-1C9C-4B8E-89C3-AC0FF7B1CDB6.jpeg


    16x

    AA146BB8-F19F-4532-B4F8-403B593FBA44.jpeg


    25x (there was no 24x marking)

    D2821863-C8B6-4755-BD41-841DB4028F55.jpeg

    _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Vortex Viper HS-T 6-24x50 VMR-1 MIL

    6x

    C69CF991-BAD5-431C-9EE7-72A1F39523AE.jpeg


    16x

    4F751226-C28B-4967-A056-B858D0E11378.jpeg


    24x

    07C1B65E-95E9-4638-BEC1-F5D6224360D4.jpeg
     
    • Like
    Reactions: buggz