Well, the competition is over.
The kids and I drove back to Denver. Tomorrow, my wife will fly here and we will head out to a different part of Wyoming for a bit of a family vacation during the coming week. Ideally, I'd like to do a livestream and talk about the competition a bit more, but my time will not be my own over the next few days. I'll let you know how it goes.
I know this will sound repetitive, but I am fully expecting to shoot in this one next year. Realistically, as far as shooting skill goes, I will definitely be in the bottom half of the shooters I saw over the last few days. That makes it even more appealing. Besides, I have a year to think it through properly. Maybe I can strategize my way into doing better than I think I can based on skill alone. Maybe not. Either way, it looked like a blast and I want to do it.
My kids got to do some shooting after competitors were done and made the plates that a lot of people were missing look easy. It is nice to not have any bad habits. If I can convince my daughter to team up with me, we might get on the podium.
Alternatively, if I can convince my brother to team up with me, we will come in dead last (in case you are wondering, yes he reads these things and I can't miss an opportunity at a brotherly dig....).
In all seriousness, the teams that placed around the top were really good. The winning team drove up from Nebraska. I saw them shoot. They are VERY good. Yet, it took them six years of participation to finally win it. Other well known names, like Dorgan Trostel, John Pynch and Chris Way were among the teams in the top five.
I got to see many different teams shoot. I followed some from stage to stage, listened to them communicate and try to figure out the best way to approach stages. Some used top end gear. Some were not equipped nearly as well. There is some minimal equipment level you need to be competitive here, but this is not an equipment race. There were a couple of stages where particular equipment made your life much easier, but for the most part it was about the shooter's skill, teamwork and ability to function after pressure.
Since I was there anyway, I made it a point to look at a couple of Burris and Steiner products that I get asked about.
I have mentioned the binoculars before, so here are the Cliff's notes:
Burris Signature LRF 10x42: for the $850-ish price I see on the web, it is an easy recommendation. https://shrsl.com/4kzs1 It looks to be very similar to the more expensive Leupold BX-4 and Optica LR. It costs less though. It is definitely from the same OEM. I think it is the same basic optic as the BX-4.
Burris Signature HD 12x50 binocular. https://alnk.to/7BeVMu0 It worked well enough, but, frankly, I think it is weaker against the field than the other two binoculars I looked at. It is not bad, but having been spending a good amount of time with 12x binoculars lately, it seemed mid-pack to me. If you find a particularly good deal, it is worth looking at, but at full price I would consider other options.
Burris Signature HD 10x42 binocular. This one I liked a lot. That is somewhat surprising since I am not a huge fan of the 10x42 configuration. Under $500 https://alnk.to/aLIzrbk, it is an easy recommendation. FOV is OK. Image quality is very good and CA is very well controlled.

Riflescopes:
I finally got to spend some time in the field with the Eliminator6 4-20x52 and I really liked it. https://alnk.to/4qLi7PL Optically, it is a serious step up from the previous generation. It is better than XTR2, but not quite as good as XTR3. Electro-optic integration is done much better. I spent some time shooting plates with it. Drop calls were dead on. Wind calculation was spot on (my wind reading skills were not always spot on). I will need to do a thorough review, but so far I am quite impressed with what I saw.
Lastly, I finally spent some time with Steiner T6Xi 3-18x56. It was on the rifle of one of the Burris guys and it is slightly different from the production version, but close enough. It is a very competent scope with very few weaknesses. Eyebox is very good. Turret feel is good. Overall image quality is excellent until about 15x. Between 15x and 18x, it goes slightly softer, but if you are not looking for it you might not see it. It is not a strong effect. For my purposes, on a gas gung, I would probably lean toward the 2.5-15x50 version of the T6Xi. I think it is slightly better optimized and I like the wide FOV on 2.5x On the other hand, if you are looking for the ultimate in low light performance, there is no replacement for cubic inches (i.e. objective diameter) and the 3-18x56 is hard to beat there. Do keep in mind that 2.5-15x50 comes with SCR in either mrad https://alnk.to/eZGKYXE or MOA, while 3-18x56 comes with either SCR2 (tree retice) https://alnk.to/e76Y4T7 or MSR2. I would like to see the 2.5-15x50 with some sort of a tree reticle as an option. Either way, both are good scopes, so pick a reticle you like.
For my own purposes, since I can not physically look at everything out there, my intentions have not changed: I would like to do a thorough review of Burris Eliminator6 4-20x52 and upcoming Steiner H6Xi 2-12x42 with mrad tree reticle before the year is over.