First AR, got optics questions [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : First AR, got optics questions


Brent1202
01-31-2011, 19:56
Just bought my first AR-15 on sat. M&P AR-15OR. Now let the modding begin!!! For you experienced guys, this is what I'm looking for...

I want a optic that I can do some plinking and range time. Probably out to 250-300 yards. I way also use for some home defense. Not wanting to go over $500. I like the Eotech's but I would assume I would need a magnifier for the longer range time? Primary arms has a Eotech XPS2 with their magnifier for a good price. Are their magnifiers any good? I know some also like the Aimpoints. Whats the advantages of one over the other?

Is there anything else I should be looking at? I don't want a rifle scope, not the look I want and this a gun I don't see myself doing a lot of hunting with.

Thanks for any help, Brent.

BBJones
01-31-2011, 21:14
For home defense (inside your home and in its immediate area) you don't need nor should you use magnification. If you want a magnifier for just at the range, the primary arms are fine. I would start with a quality red dot and decide if you want a magnifier later. I prefer Aimpoints (particularly micros) to EOTechs but they each have their fans.

MrMurphy
01-31-2011, 21:15
Do you want hits, or tiny groups?

Hits at 250-300 with an Aimpoint, no major issues. Tiny groups? Get a magnified scope. Magnifiers will help you see the target some, they won't help you shoot better.

An Aimpoint Comp ML2 or C3 for home defense in a LaRue LT129, and a low-cost riflescope, something like a Nikon Coyote 3X9 for the longer range in an LT104 can be interchanged with no loss of zero.

Glock21Owner
01-31-2011, 21:53
Look at the Millett 1-4x24, a great scope for $199 at MidwayUSA

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=186660

R.K. Watkins
01-31-2011, 21:56
Aimpoint T-1 or H-1 for home defense, and good out to 100 yards +. You can always fet a magnifier/multiplier to mount behind it later if increasd magnification is a must. But you will be surprised what you can do with the T-1 or H-1. Absolutely dean nuts reliable and bomb proof with extremely long battery life and FAST!

IDPA_Shooter
01-31-2011, 22:08
Aimpoint battery life is 50,000 hours or about 5 years! Consider a 2moa dot for finer aiming at longer targets. However, 250-300 yds. is too far for no magnification on paper targets. Military uses the ACOG for longer ranges, but the cost is high.

Many like the EOTECH but battery life is much shorter. All three are in use in by US.

Your M&P AR looks like a more standard model and may only shoot 1.5-2.5 MOA. This translates to 4.5-7.5 inches mechanical accuracy at 300 yds. Add to that the shooters capabilities and you may want to stick to closer targets.

Don't forget the wind becomes much more significant at 300 yds. making the shooting even more challenging.

Not trying to discourage anyone from shooting at any range, but remember there are many factors to consider after you get past 150-200 yds.

Brent1202
02-01-2011, 06:22
Do you want hits, or tiny groups?

Hits at 250-300 with an Aimpoint, no major issues. Tiny groups? Get a magnified scope. Magnifiers will help you see the target some, they won't help you shoot better.

An Aimpoint Comp ML2 or C3 for home defense in a LaRue LT129, and a low-cost riflescope, something like a Nikon Coyote 3X9 for the longer range in an LT104 can be interchanged with no loss of zero.


I'm not looking for a tack driver but would like tight groups. I'll take a look at those Aimpoints

Brent1202
02-01-2011, 06:28
Aimpoint battery life is 50,000 hours or about 5 years! Consider a 2moa dot for finer aiming at longer targets. However, 250-300 yds. is too far for no magnification on paper targets. Military uses the ACOG for longer ranges, but the cost is high.

Many like the EOTECH but battery life is much shorter. All three are in use in by US.

Your M&P AR looks like a more standard model and may only shoot 1.5-2.5 MOA. This translates to 4.5-7.5 inches mechanical accuracy at 300 yds. Add to that the shooters capabilities and you may want to stick to closer targets.

Don't forget the wind becomes much more significant at 300 yds. making the shooting even more challenging.

Not trying to discourage anyone from shooting at any range, but remember there are many factors to consider after you get past 150-200 yds.


More than likely I'll be doing most of my shooting out to 150-200 max, but, I'd like to have the ability to do so. Kinda why I was learning towards the Eotech was I could use it for target, possible some IDPA down the road, maybe some close varmit(very little if any). I like the idea of maving a quick release magnifier for when I want to put some further down range. Does this sound like I'm heading in the right direction?

surf
02-01-2011, 10:44
Aimpoint and EoTech each have magnifiers. The Aimpoint v. EoTech is like Ford v. Chevy or Coke v. Pepsi. For your average shooter it will really come down to preference and generally the reticle is what sways people one way or the other.

150-200 yards upper torso no problem, even head shot size hits can be pretty routine. 300 yards and upper torso sized hits is easily maintained, but I tend to want magnification at these ranges for observational purposes.

If I do up close work I generally do not like a tubular type of optic even on 1x mag.

Brent1202
02-01-2011, 12:14
I got to see one of the Eotech xps2 today at a local gun shop. I liked it. Very light. Liked being able to keep both eyes open with the sight. I'm going to check a couple other places to see if I can look threw a Aimpoint. The Eotech left a very good impression with me to be honest.

WoodenPlank
02-01-2011, 12:14
Aimpoint and EoTech each have magnifiers. The Aimpoint v. EoTech is like Ford v. Chevy or Coke v. Pepsi. For your average shooter it will really come down to preference and generally the reticle is what sways people one way or the other.


I cannot use an EO Tech any more, simply because the reticle drives me nuts. It has nothing to do with the shape (which I actually like) but the whole thing appears fuzzy due to my astigmatism. It is nowhere near as easy for my eyes as my Aimpoint. I have heard this complain from other shooters with astigmatism, as well, even if it is corrected with glasses or contacts.

MrMurphy
02-01-2011, 12:45
Toss in the short battery life and "dies randomly including during firefights' method of operation, while i've had a few Eotechs, i only use Aimpoints whenever possible.

surf
02-01-2011, 15:36
I cannot use an EO Tech any more, simply because the reticle drives me nuts. It has nothing to do with the shape (which I actually like) but the whole thing appears fuzzy due to my astigmatism. It is nowhere near as easy for my eyes as my Aimpoint. I have heard this complain from other shooters with astigmatism, as well, even if it is corrected with glasses or contacts.Yep that is one of the reticle aspects that sway many shooters. Because the EoTech is a true holo sight as opposed to an LED, a fuzzy reticle or "blooming" can be a result in some shooters with eye issues.

cowboy1964
02-01-2011, 16:06
Toss in the short battery life and "dies randomly including during firefights' method of operation

This has been covered to death. I have no qualms with the battery life on my EoTech. Batteries on tac lights die rather suddenly as well. Preventive Maintenance.

glock22357
02-01-2011, 16:11
As a counter-point, I love my Eotech. Aimpoints have some excellent attributes, no doubt, so check both out. As far as Eotechs go, one of the newest XPS models has side-mounted controls, excellent for mounting a magnifier behind.

ColdBlooded
02-01-2011, 16:23
Vortex StrikeFire with magnification(screws right on).

Leupold Mark AR 1x-4x

Alaskapopo
02-01-2011, 16:45
Just bought my first AR-15 on sat. M&P AR-15OR. Now let the modding begin!!! For you experienced guys, this is what I'm looking for...

I want a optic that I can do some plinking and range time. Probably out to 250-300 yards. I way also use for some home defense. Not wanting to go over $500. I like the Eotech's but I would assume I would need a magnifier for the longer range time? Primary arms has a Eotech XPS2 with their magnifier for a good price. Are their magnifiers any good? I know some also like the Aimpoints. Whats the advantages of one over the other?

Is there anything else I should be looking at? I don't want a rifle scope, not the look I want and this a gun I don't see myself doing a lot of hunting with.

Thanks for any help, Brent.
I have no experience with this scope but its getting good reviews from people I know.
The Burris Tac 30 it comes in under your price point.

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=119196

I would not waste your money on an eotech. Frankly I believe the days of the full size red dot sight are limited. Compact red dots will do the same thing in a smaller package for those who want a short range rifle. For those who want to be able to shoot to the potential of their rifle are better served with one of the many good 1-4,5,6,8 power scopes coming out on the market.
My personal favorites is the Swarovski Z6i BRT 1-6 scope and the Trijicon TR24 1-4.
Pat

MrMurphy
02-01-2011, 16:46
I like the Eo reticle, just not the performance (after having used and sold them for a living).

As to white lights, i used a whitelight on a weapon daily for searching for 3 years and ONCE had a light fail due to battery. I drew my handheld and continued the mission.

mstennes
02-01-2011, 16:50
Check this out if you want a Eo http://www.opticsplanet.net/l3-eotech-opmod-exps2-holographic-sights-limited-edition-red-dot-sights-exps2-0-opmod.html

surf
02-01-2011, 17:36
I will add this Brent.

Like a couple of the other fellas posting here I am not a young guy and I also remember the days prior to red dots and I have watched them evolve from the beginning. I am an old school Aimpoint guy. I also had a bad taste in my mouth over EoTechs from the early models and their associated issues.

About 4 years ago my unit equipped our 65 Colt M4A1's with the EoTech 553's (which wasn't my vote). I will admit that 5 of the EoTech's had issues with the battery connection which was found very early after purchase. We did do the battery fix on all 65 of the EoTech's. I carry this rifle on a nearly a daily basis as my primary weapon and literally beat the piss out of it as do the other guys in my unit. We have not had one issue in any of these EoTechs once we did the battery fix. So yes, a simple fix was necessary, but not one single other issue in almost 4 years in all 65 units seeing heavy use.

Another interesting story, is that a co worker was involved in an auto accident. I just got his rifle 2 weeks ago. His receiver extension tube was sheared off at the castle nut, his DD rail was cracked at the receiver end, his lower was tweaked and his barrel was bent. I thought for sure his EoTech 512 was toast. Damn if it didn't power right up.

I do a lot of factory work and custom builds or modifications. On many I have used the XPS versions and I haven't had one come back yet. No doubt the Aimpoint is more rugged. By the more simplistic electronics alone I would automatically assume it to be more durable, but yes even the housing is built like a tank. There is no argument IMO that the Aimpoint is more rugged. Even though I feel that the Aimpoint is more rugged, in my own experiences I am very comfortable in my own experiences in the duty worthiness of the newer EoTech models. As for battery life, if your going off to war and cannot get batteries easily I might opt for the Aimpoint. However you can easily get well over a year of use out of the EoTech even under heavy use. Some end users who have duty or military applications might set a higher priority on other things than just the reticle and that is good also.

So what is the moral? For your average weekend shooter, pick whichever reticle works best for you. Is it Coke, or is it Pepsi?

Edit - I should also add that even if you like a single dot only but still want the EoTech, you can get that also.

mstennes
02-01-2011, 18:06
I will add this Brent.

Like a couple of the other fellas posting here I am not a young guy and I also remember the days prior to red dots and I have watched them evolve from the beginning. I am an old school Aimpoint guy. I also had a bad taste in my mouth over EoTechs from the early models and their associated issues.

About 4 years ago my unit equipped our 65 Colt M4A1's with the EoTech 553's (which wasn't my vote). I will admit that 5 of the EoTech's had issues with the battery connection which was found very early after purchase. We did do the battery fix on all 65 of the EoTech's. I carry this rifle on a nearly a daily basis as my primary weapon and literally beat the piss out of it as do the other guys in my unit. We have not had one issue in any of these EoTechs once we did the battery fix. So yes, a simple fix was necessary, but not one single other issue in almost 4 years in all 65 units seeing heavy use.

Another interesting story, is that a co worker was involved in an auto accident. I just got his rifle 2 weeks ago. His receiver extension tube was sheared off at the castle nut, his DD rail was cracked at the receiver end, his lower was tweaked and his barrel was bent. I thought for sure his EoTech 512 was toast. Damn if it didn't power right up.

I do a lot of factory work and custom builds or modifications. On many I have used the XPS versions and I haven't had one come back yet. No doubt the Aimpoint is more rugged. By the more simplistic electronics alone I would automatically assume it to be more durable, but yes even the housing is built like a tank. There is no argument IMO that the Aimpoint is more rugged. Even though I feel that the Aimpoint is more rugged, in my own experiences I am very comfortable in my own experiences in the duty worthiness of the newer EoTech models. As for battery life, if your going off to war and cannot get batteries easily I might opt for the Aimpoint. However you can easily get well over a year of use out of the EoTech even under heavy use. Some end users who have duty or military applications might set a higher priority on other things than just the reticle and that is good also.

So what is the moral? For your average weekend shooter, pick whichever reticle works best for you. Is it Coke, or is it Pepsi?

Edit - I should also add that even if you like a single dot only but still want the EoTech, you can get that also.

I put the OPMOD link there, as its a EXPS Eotech with OPMOD on the side, its made by Eo for Optics Planet, they even tell you that for allot less then the exact same model Eo. I have had Aimpoints (Comp M3 and M4) and just never really cared for them, but the Opmod price may make me get another Eo, now my rifles are outfitted with either TA11's, TA31's or Leupold Mark 4 1.5x5's, I'am looking hard at the TR24, it has gotten some pretty good reviews. Optics are like AR's you get what you pay for. The thing I like about the TA31 is the field of view and both eyes open quickness (not as fast as a dot though) but the TA11's have excellent eye relief, so I guess, what one person reccomends might not be what you like best, the best thing is, is to go to a good shop and ask to look at different models, when your at the range see if you look through some different setups, while the Eo's and Aimpoints have optional magnifiers, they add weight, cost and take up rail estate. Good Luck!

Novocaine
02-02-2011, 00:32
There’s no perfect compromise. The classic compromise is 1-4X 24 illuminated scope. Everyone is making one these days so the market is saturated but in my book the best under $1K is Vortex Viper PST (around $500); the best under $500 is Leatherwood CMR (around $300).

This type of sights is usable for short distances but will not hold the candle to a red dot. Of which Aimpoint Micro is the best IMHO.

I don’t understand the deal with magnifiers. They also magnify the dot which defeats the purpose of the whole exercise. You might want to consider having two scopes in QD mounts. Red dot (bought first and kept on the rifle while at home) and later you can add something along the lines of 2.5-10X40 for more rewarding target work.

Alaskapopo
02-02-2011, 00:55
There’s no perfect compromise. The classic compromise is 1-4X 24 illuminated scope. Everyone is making one these days so the market is saturated but in my book the best under $1K is Vortex Viper PST (around $500); the best under $500 is Leatherwood CMR (around $300).

This type of sights is usable for short distances but will not hold the candle to a red dot. Of which Aimpoint Micro is the best IMHO.

I don’t understand the deal with magnifiers. They also magnify the dot which defeats the purpose of the whole exercise. You might want to consider having two scopes in QD mounts. Red dot (bought first and kept on the rifle while at home) and later you can add something along the lines of 2.5-10X40 for more rewarding target work.

I have to disagree with you there. In all the CQB drills I have done I am just as fast with my scopes on 1x as I am with my RDS sights. The only advantage to the RDS is form awkward firing positions.

Example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFlJVVZDx68
M4 Aimpoint

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwtbL0tTirg
TR24
Both same gun.

Also the problem with having two scopes on QD mounts is situations change rapidly in real life. For example in LEO work you may be on the perimeter one minute and then running up to the house to do a rescue on a wounded entry team member the next. There is no time to swap out optics. A better plan is to have a optic system that can handle near and far. There are a few ways to do this.
1. A good low power variable scope.
2. A Red Dot Sight with a magnifier in a flip to side mount.
3. Two optics on same weapon. Such as an ACOG with a Red dot in an off set mount like this.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/AR%20style%20rifles/ColtCarbine.jpg
Or this
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/AR%20style%20rifles/LarueStealth.jpg

Personally I would never chose a rifle with just a red dot or just an ACOG again. The only single optic set up I like is a low power variable.

Pat

More pics.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/AR%20style%20rifles/NOveskeN4.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/AR%20style%20rifles/RogueHunterthreegun.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Optics/2.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Optics/Magnifieroutoftheway.jpg

Also magnifiers don't magnifier the dot. The Dot stays the same size. So a 2 moa dot is still 2 moa in a 3x magnifier. You just see everything bigger. A magnifier gives someone with a RDS sight the ability to reach a little further out there and it also allows for better target ID.
I do agree that the AImpoint Micro is the best of the red dots right now.

surf
02-02-2011, 02:44
I have the ACOG TA31 Doc Optic, dual crosshair variant, which I deploy under certain circumstances and obviously I have extensively trained with it. I also have a Leupy CQT variable and I have tested and used many other short dot / tube type optics. They have their place but IMHO for up close work even out to 100m I am not a fan. I only mention magnifiers as that was the topic asked. I am personally not a fan of magnifiers due to length, weight, tubular, the need to flip etc but yes, I own the set up.

On a timer up close, I am nowhere near as fast with any tube type optic period as I am with a EoTech or an Aimpoint. I may be splitting hairs on speed when talking fractions or hundreds of a second, but for myself it is easily repeatable on a timer. I am quicker with the EoTech but the Aimpoint is still slightly behind. OK maybe hundreds of a second might be splitting hairs on my evals, but time is time. I will take every fraction of a second I can get if my life is on the line.

I often find myself shooting from hasty, alternate or improvised shooting positions and rarely find myself in a nice shooting platform. I very much need that flexibility which as Pat mentioned is often not available in certain types of tubular optics. Most of my work is up close but even out to say 200m, I really don't need a magnified optic for what I would consider acceptable combat hits for a battle rifle. So for my needs a short dot or similar is out of the question. I deploy under set circumstances. Up close, red dot. Longer distance I deploy with a bolt rifle and an M4 with an ACOG. Just depends on my assigned role.

Of course much is related to the shooters actual needs and their preferences. In reality I am quite sure the OP's needs are quite a bit different and for him and in reality I am quite sure his decision is a Coke v. Pepsi type of thing. Don't sweat it. Pick which one you like. They are both high quality IMO.

mstennes
02-02-2011, 07:03
Just bought my first AR-15 on sat. M&P AR-15OR. Now let the modding begin!!! For you experienced guys, this is what I'm looking for...

I want a optic that I can do some plinking and range time. Probably out to 250-300 yards. I way also use for some home defense. Not wanting to go over $500. I like the Eotech's but I would assume I would need a magnifier for the longer range time? Primary arms has a Eotech XPS2 with their magnifier for a good price. Are their magnifiers any good? I know some also like the Aimpoints. Whats the advantages of one over the other?

Is there anything else I should be looking at? I don't want a rifle scope, not the look I want and this a gun I don't see myself doing a lot of hunting with.

Thanks for any help, Brent.

OP after rereading this, I would go with a 1.4x5 TR24, MR/T etc, it may not give you the look you want, but it will be the useable/beneficial scope setup for you, you dial it down for close in, or run it up for those 250-300+ yard shots, I will also be your do try it out on coyotes and other small varmits. Its also going to be the most economical, you may spend a little more than a Eo or Aimpoint, but you will have 3+x the useability.

mstennes
02-02-2011, 07:05
I have to disagree with you there. In all the CQB drills I have done I am just as fast with my scopes on 1x as I am with my RDS sights. The only advantage to the RDS is form awkward firing positions.

Example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFlJVVZDx68
M4 Aimpoint

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwtbL0tTirg
TR24
Both same gun.

Also the problem with having two scopes on QD mounts is situations change rapidly in real life. For example in LEO work you may be on the perimeter one minute and then running up to the house to do a rescue on a wounded entry team member the next. There is no time to swap out optics. A better plan is to have a optic system that can handle near and far. There are a few ways to do this.
1. A good low power variable scope.
2. A Red Dot Sight with a magnifier in a flip to side mount.
3. Two optics on same weapon. Such as an ACOG with a Red dot in an off set mount like this.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/AR%20style%20rifles/ColtCarbine.jpg
Or this
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/AR%20style%20rifles/LarueStealth.jpg

Personally I would never chose a rifle with just a red dot or just an ACOG again. The only single optic set up I like is a low power variable.

Pat

More pics.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/AR%20style%20rifles/NOveskeN4.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/AR%20style%20rifles/RogueHunterthreegun.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Optics/2.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Optics/Magnifieroutoftheway.jpg

Also magnifiers don't magnifier the dot. The Dot stays the same size. So a 2 moa dot is still 2 moa in a 3x magnifier. You just see everything bigger. A magnifier gives someone with a RDS sight the ability to reach a little further out there and it also allows for better target ID.
I do agree that the AImpoint Micro is the best of the red dots right now.

What is the point of a ACOG and Aimpoint together? Seems to me just more weight and wasted rail estate?

mjkeat
02-02-2011, 07:49
What is the point of a ACOG and Aimpoint together? Seems to me just more weight and wasted rail estate?

The ACOG is magnified making close in shots more difficult. The RDS is not. What else does he need that little bit of rail for? It would be empty if not for the RDS. The mount probably doesn't weigh much. I know the Aimpoint doesn't.

mstennes
02-02-2011, 10:54
The ACOG is magnified making close in shots more difficult. The RDS is not. What else does he need that little bit of rail for? It would be empty if not for the RDS. The mount probably doesn't weigh much. I know the Aimpoint doesn't.

I understand the magnification and non magnified, but what do you do, pull the ACOG off, for short range, than reinstall for longer range? The ACOG allready has its own reticle.

mjkeat
02-02-2011, 11:00
See how its off-set? A slight, quick flip of the rifle and the RDS is ready to go. No need to remove any optics or physically reach up and move a magnifier out of the way. Its a very fast transition. Some guys mount a Trijicon doctor on top of their optic. Same basic concept.

surf
02-02-2011, 11:18
I understand the magnification and non magnified, but what do you do, pull the ACOG off, for short range, than reinstall for longer range? The ACOG allready has its own reticle.As mjkeat mentions the smaller red dot R1 is on an offset mount. Alaskapopo can slightly cant the weapon to quickly use the red dot. It has become fairly common to do this type of set up as the advantage is that the red dot stays closer inline to the bore of the rifle so the offset is minimal and better for zeroing.

My ACOG originally came with a Doc Optic red dot mounted on top of the ACOG. As seen in the pictures below, the top mounted red dot makes it hard for me to get a quick transition to the dot for up close shooting due to a poor, or lack of a cheek weld. The height of the red dot over bore also makes issues for zeroing at say 25m, even though I zero it at 50y. So offsetting the red dot close to the bore of the rifle solves some problems.

My ACOG with Doc Optic
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd60/SSDSurf/Guns/ACOG01.jpg

Height overbore is about 4.5".
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd60/SSDSurf/Guns/ACOG04.jpg

nipperwolf
02-02-2011, 11:20
I understand the magnification and non magnified, but what do you do, pull the ACOG off, for short range, than reinstall for longer range? The ACOG allready has its own reticle.

Allow Jerry to demonsrate;

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/lid=12953/guntechdetail/Jerry_Miculek_Practical_Rifle_DVD_Trailer

mjkeat
02-02-2011, 11:47
Allow Jerry to demonsrate;

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/lid=12953/guntechdetail/Jerry_Miculek_Practical_Rifle_DVD_Trailer

That man is fast.

mstennes
02-02-2011, 13:01
See how its off-set? A slight, quick flip of the rifle and the RDS is ready to go. No need to remove any optics or physically reach up and move a magnifier out of the way. Its a very fast transition. Some guys mount a Trijicon doctor on top of their optic. Same basic concept.

Dang, I must be getting old (ok thats why I like magnified optics), I didnt notice it was canted, for some reason my eyes told me it was in line, and that didnt make sense. Yes I can see it canted as being very fast.

mstennes
02-02-2011, 13:03
As mjkeat mentions the smaller red dot R1 is on an offset mount. Alaskapopo can slightly cant the weapon to quickly use the red dot. It has become fairly common to do this type of set up as the advantage is that the red dot stays closer inline to the bore of the rifle so the offset is minimal and better for zeroing.

My ACOG originally came with a Doc Optic red dot mounted on top of the ACOG. As seen in the pictures below, the top mounted red dot makes it hard for me to get a quick transition to the dot for up close shooting due to a poor, or lack of a cheek weld. The height of the red dot over bore also makes issues for zeroing at say 25m, even though I zero it at 50y. So offsetting the red dot close to the bore of the rifle solves some problems.

My ACOG with Doc Optic
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd60/SSDSurf/Guns/ACOG01.jpg

Height overbore is about 4.5".
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd60/SSDSurf/Guns/ACOG04.jpg


Surf,
I had that same setup, and I also removed the doc optics, it was to high, and to slow. I see people still doing it, but most are weekend commandos:whistling:

surf
02-02-2011, 14:00
Surf,
I had that same setup, and I also removed the doc optics, it was to high, and to slow. I see people still doing it, but most are weekend commandos:whistling:That was a factory offering and issued in that configuration. When they first came out, many people, LE and military were running them that way, many guys using them in LE and military still are, so it really isn't a weekend commando thing. For some shooters it works well, but for myself, that set up didn't have merit as I couldn't get a quick dot acquisition because of a lack of consistent cheek weld. Or more correctly I had to rest my chin on the top of the stock to get a sight picture with the red dot which was not highly repeatable and it made it way too slow when transitioning from the magnified ACOG to the red dot. In that configuration I was better off staying on the ACOG for quick up close stuff, but the magnification and tube effect made me noticeably slower which for myself was unacceptable. Also the tall height over bore creates problems. That set up didn't last long and with the advent of offset mounts, there are better solutions.

Alaskapopo
02-02-2011, 14:08
Some pics I had from when I ran a TA33 instead of a TA 31. Same off set red dot mount.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Optics/ACOG.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Optics/ViewthroughAImpoint1.jpg

mstennes
02-02-2011, 14:58
That was a factory offering and issued in that configuration. When they first came out, many people, LE and military were running them that way, many guys using them in LE and military still are, so it really isn't a weekend commando thing. For some shooters it works well, but for myself, that set up didn't have merit as I couldn't get a quick dot acquisition because of a lack of consistent cheek weld. Or more correctly I had to rest my chin on the top of the stock to get a sight picture with the red dot which was not highly repeatable and it made it way too slow when transitioning from the magnified ACOG to the red dot. In that configuration I was better off staying on the ACOG for quick up close stuff, but the magnification and tube effect made me noticeably slower which for myself was unacceptable. Also the tall height over bore creates problems. That set up didn't last long and with the advent of offset mounts, there are better solutions.

Sorry about my weekned commando remark, I know there are LEO's who use it here some, but mostly I have seen it at the range where its more of a case to see who can put what on look the most important. Mine also came that way, and I agree 100% with what your saying on its use. I actually have found with my TA11, I'm not that much slower with its increased eye relief, but I'am slower on the TA31.

Captains1911
02-02-2011, 16:57
This has been covered to death. I have no qualms with the battery life on my EoTech. Batteries on tac lights die rather suddenly as well. Preventive Maintenance.

Some EOTechs will drain batteries in a matter of weeks as they sit turned off. Preventive maintenance will not help this.

Go Aimpoint if reliability is your number one priority.

moeman
02-02-2011, 22:39
Some pics I had from when I ran a TA33 instead of a TA 31. Same off set red dot mount.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Optics/ACOG.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Optics/ViewthroughAImpoint1.jpg

What mount gives that kind of offset?

surf
02-02-2011, 23:04
Sorry about my weekned commando remark, I know there are LEO's who use it here some, but mostly I have seen it at the range where its more of a case to see who can put what on look the most important. Mine also came that way, and I agree 100% with what your saying on its use. I actually have found with my TA11, I'm not that much slower with its increased eye relief, but I'am slower on the TA31.Hey don't apologize and I meant no offense. Besides I almost never shoot on the weekends. I am at the range almost all week long so weekends are for other things. :supergrin:

I also agree that the eye relief on the 31 is less than ideal.

What mount gives that kind of offset?I believe Alaskapopo's rifle has the Larue offset mount. Daniel Defense, Gear Sector and quite a few other companies make offset mounts.

M1A Shooter
02-02-2011, 23:10
i too will vote for the aimpoint for reliability. ive done combat tours with the eotech and aimpoint and the aimpoint is by far a better optic. i may be biased since i have had the eotech auto shutoff feature work as it should when i really didnt need it to.

right now i have a reddot on one carbine and a 1-4x on the other. i am really liking the low power variable.

Alaskapopo
02-02-2011, 23:35
What mount gives that kind of offset?

Surf answered but its a Larue mount. Daniel Defense also works but the angle on the DD mount is not as good for me.
http://stores.homestead.com/Laruetactical/Detail.bok?no=398

669Guy
02-03-2011, 00:11
This is the setup I'm using. I dont have any experience with the aimpoints, but I love my Eotech! I cant see anything being faster at target aquesition. The magnifier is a nice bonus but dont expect tight groups at 200yrds.

669Guy
02-03-2011, 00:16
Still new to this site. Can someone help me out, every time I post a pic its really small...? How do I change that?

669Guy
02-03-2011, 00:19
AAHHHHH, How do I make these pics bigger?

Tomac
02-03-2011, 06:28
I cannot use an EO Tech any more, simply because the reticle drives me nuts. It has nothing to do with the shape (which I actually like) but the whole thing appears fuzzy due to my astigmatism. It is nowhere near as easy for my eyes as my Aimpoint. I have heard this complain from other shooters with astigmatism, as well, even if it is corrected with glasses or contacts.

Astigmatism has started making Eotechs & Aimpoints much more difficult for me to use. I'm currently experimenting w/two new optics; the Leupold 1xTactical Prismatic & Burris 1-4x Tac30. Both have focusing oculars to correct my astigmatism and it's made a *huge* difference in my shooting.

The Prismatic has a much greater FOV through the optic than an Aimpoint or Eotech and is probably more rugged than the Tac30 but I much prefer the Tac30's Eotech-style reticle w/holdovers.

Both have etched reticles that are visible w/o battery illumination and the Tac30 provides the option of greater magnification if desired.
Tomac

Burris Tac30 50yd reticle shots at both 1x & 4x:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/Tomac/1xTac30Black.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/Tomac/1xTac30Red.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/Tomac/4xTac30Black.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/Tomac/4xTac30Red.jpg

Leupold Prisatic reticle shots:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/Tomac/PrismaticReticleBlack.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/Tomac/PrismaticReticleRed.jpg

BuckyP
02-03-2011, 07:24
Astigmatism has started making Eotechs & Aimpoints much more difficult for me to use. I'm currently experimenting w/two new optics; the Leupold 1xTactical Prismatic & Burris 1-4x Tac30. Both have focusing oculars to correct my astigmatism and it's made a *huge* difference in my shooting.


How would you rate the ruggedness / durability of each of these?

TIA.

Flashbang1063
02-03-2011, 07:43
It is a few dollars more than your requirements, but I would reccommend the Trijicon TR24 with the triangle recticle. I just received mine from Primary Arms for less than $665 shipped. Ordered Jan 31 and received it on Feb 2nd.

At 1x the red triangle can be used like a red dot. For more precision, crank it to 4x.

It is illuminated with fiber optics and tritium so it is always "on" and ready to go. The red triangle is bright and crisp...even with contact lenses and my astigmatism.

There is no perfect option, but I feel a quality 1-4x illuminated scope is one of the best all around options out there...and of all the 1-4x scopes, I like the TR24 the best.

MrMurphy
02-03-2011, 10:07
The Prismatic has ridiculously low battery life. Fine for hunting, i would not depend on it for life threatening situations though.

ScrappyDoo
02-03-2011, 10:54
I've said this a fw times, I thank Alaska extremely much for the 411 about the Aimpoint Micro sale. I have two, one on my new Bushmaster XM15. And it's awesome, I am totally sold on Aimpoint

I almost got an EOTech before, I like them I think. I think I would either really like the Large 65 MOA circle around a small circle (it looks like a HUGE Reticle for CQB in some pics I've seen) but that BDC reticle looks extremely useful if used properly, it seems like it makes the proper rifle/sight combo a deadly awesome CQB & battlefield-precision rifle.

I think of my XM as a CQB rifle and therefore my Micro is perfect. I'm not reeaaaal concerned with long range shots with it on a regular basis, thats not what I got it for. In another sitatuin maybe I'd change, but for right now I LOVE my Aimpoint.

Oh andf the whole, leave it on for 5 years on one battery, thats prewtty good too!

XDMerciless
02-03-2011, 11:17
I want a optic that I can do some plinking and range time. Probably out to 250-300 yards. I way also use for some home defense. Not wanting to go over $500. I like the Eotech's but I would assume I would need a magnifier for the longer range time? Primary arms has a Eotech XPS2 with their magnifier for a good price. Are their magnifiers any good? I know some also like the Aimpoints. Whats the advantages of one over the other? Is there anything else I should be looking at? I don't want a rifle scope, not the look I want and this a gun I don't see myself doing a lot of hunting with.

Thanks for any help, Brent.

I personally prefer the EOTech after years of use, at first thinking the reticule is too cluttered, grown up with the traditional red dot, but through the years I've grown very accustomed to the reticule, I find I'm more consistent using the EOTech than the traditional red dot, absolutely love the ability to focus on the 65 MOA ring for close engagements, and 1 MOA dot to make precision shots, and also range estimate with the reticule as a average human being vertically spanning within the 65 MOA ring would be roughly at 100 meters, half that 200 meters, half that 400, etc. Though, I've never had any problems with my EOTech 512 Rev F, 2007; the issues documented with the EOTech would at the very least give me pause, and has made me question the confidence I have on my primary optic, but that is what BUIS are for. In retrospect, if I had to do it all over again, I'd would have chosen the Aimpoint, Comp M4 or T1/H1. In the end, it is a no brainer, with Aimpoint - better battery life, proven reliability, and lesser weight makes it a winner. There is a lot to be said, that for a battle ready rifle, I shouldn't have to toggle a "On" switch. No matter what high-speed-low-drag-uber-death-touch-gizmo-or-gadget you put on your rifle, whatever you choose, make sure you get the training you require to employ the rifle effectively for your needs. I've seen people at carbine classes with irons only out shoot new shooters with ACOGs, Aimpoints, EOTechs, and Leupolds.

mstennes
02-03-2011, 17:27
It is a few dollars more than your requirements, but I would reccommend the Trijicon TR24 with the triangle recticle. I just received mine from Primary Arms for less than $665 shipped. Ordered Jan 31 and received it on Feb 2nd.

At 1x the red triangle can be used like a red dot. For more precision, crank it to 4x.

It is illuminated with fiber optics and tritium so it is always "on" and ready to go. The red triangle is bright and crisp...even with contact lenses and my astigmatism.

There is no perfect option, but I feel a quality 1-4x illuminated scope is one of the best all around options out there...and of all the 1-4x scopes, I like the TR24 the best.

Have you tried other 1-4's, I have conssidered it, but than started leaning back on the Loopy 1.5-5, but cant decide on CMR-2 or TMR reticle. I used to have one with a SPR reticle, and sold it, now I wish that was a option, again should have never sold it!!!!

Tomac
02-03-2011, 17:37
The Prismatic has ridiculously low battery life. Fine for hunting, i would not depend on it for life threatening situations though.

Prismatic battery life is 15hrs at max, 40hrs at setting 5 of 8 and I'm currently testing battery life at the lowest setting (130hrs as of this writing and no 'battery low' warning yet). Plus, it has an etched reticle that is very visible when using a taclight even if battery illumination should fail.
If I jumped out of helicopters for a living I'd want longer battery life but if something goes 'bump' in the night I seriously doubt I'd need more than 15hrs of max illumination...
Tomac

Tomac
02-03-2011, 17:44
How would you rate the ruggedness / durability of each of these?
TIA.

Neither of these has been tested to destruction AFAIK, but the Prismatic is listed by Leupold as being "their toughest optic yet" and being a 1x optic w/few moving parts there's little to go wrong w/it. Very rugged IMHO.

Burris is known for quality products but IMHO a variable is always going to be more fragile than a fixed (unless you start looking at USN/Nightforce/Elcan Spectre DR/etc which are all out of my price range). The Tac30, albeit new, was made specifically for the 3-gun crowd which isn't known for babying their gear. For a $300 optic I think it's fairly rugged but not as rugged as an Aimpoint.

Bottom line, *IMHO* the Prismatic is more durable/rugged than the Tac30.
HTH...
Tomac

gemeinschaft
02-03-2011, 17:46
I guess I don't belong on this thread. I hate using optics.

Iron Sights will be the last thing to fail you, unless they are on a quick release, swivel or fold down.... :soap:

That being said, I have used Aimpoints, EoTech, Reflex sights, Leupold CQ/T and some others - No matter what, I always end up going back to Iron Sights.

I like my rifle set up for 0-300yards with zero adjustments. A hint of white paint on the front sight ramp is always appreciated. :whistling:

mstennes
02-03-2011, 18:25
I guess I don't belong on this thread. I hate using optics.

Iron Sights will be the last thing to fail you, unless they are on a quick release, swivel or fold down.... :soap:

That being said, I have used Aimpoints, EoTech, Reflex sights, Leupold CQ/T and some others - No matter what, I always end up going back to Iron Sights.

I like my rifle set up for 0-300yards with zero adjustments. A hint of white paint on the front sight ramp is always appreciated. :whistling:

Optics have been proven in battle, if you stick with good, proven optics, sure they can fail, but not like a Tasco, or Burris, that said, my eyes dont support irons as well as they used to anymore:crying:

gemeinschaft
02-03-2011, 18:57
Optics have been proven in battle, if you stick with good, proven optics, sure they can fail, but not like a Tasco, or Burris, that said, my eyes dont support irons as well as they used to anymore:crying:

The way you set up your rifle is a very personal choice. Mine is based on my experience in the past as well as my abilities/comfort zone.

That being said, others have issues with Iron Sights or specific optic selections due to their abilities/comfort zone.

It may be best for the OP to test drive everything and see what works for them.

Alaskapopo
02-03-2011, 19:21
I guess I don't belong on this thread. I hate using optics.

Iron Sights will be the last thing to fail you, unless they are on a quick release, swivel or fold down.... :soap:

That being said, I have used Aimpoints, EoTech, Reflex sights, Leupold CQ/T and some others - No matter what, I always end up going back to Iron Sights.

I like my rifle set up for 0-300yards with zero adjustments. A hint of white paint on the front sight ramp is always appreciated. :whistling:

Irons can be used very effectively when you have good light conditions but in low light optics totally kick their ass. Optics also greatly improve your performance as the range increases. In my experience Irons can be just as fast at close range (25 yards or less) but turn the lights down and they become pretty useless pretty quick even with weapon mounted lights their utility is limited. Optics truly do increase your effectiveness. I had an experience last summer that really opened my eyes on irons vs optics at night. That being said I know there are some truely exceptional shooters with irons in the 3 gun world like Kurt Miller.
Pat

ScrappyDoo
02-03-2011, 19:24
Hey good on ya for using iron sights. And good on ya for sticking to your principles etc. etc. But you do realize, you're at a significant disadvantage right? I mean, all things being equal, you're almost always going to lose in a tactical situation vs. someone with optics. All things NOT equal, optics give an advantage to the person with them, so you have to overcome that. And in further sliding of the advantage/disadvantage scale, certain situations you basically "can't win" vs. the person with optics (say a scope that he can see you and therefore hit you but you can't see him so you can't hit him).

Now two things; Please don't think I'm trying to pick a fight, I'm not, it's just I see a lot of people that *like* using just iron sights try to show someone it's the Proper/correct/"better" thing to do... Certainly the right way to *learn* but IMHO not after that... And also, I'm tired and I am not wording my explanations proper, so don't kill me for improper analogies, I'm sure I can think of something better in the morning :)

dale mcminnis
02-03-2011, 19:45
Look at the Millett 1-4x24, a great scope for $199 at MidwayUSA

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=186660

I have this scope on my M&P 15 you can go no magnification it like a reflex sight for up close,or dial it up to 4 although I think 300 yards might be tough,but 200 very doable.I got the scope Burris perpa rings,and Butler Creek end caps for about $200.00.I really like it.

Flashbang1063
02-04-2011, 06:55
Have you tried other 1-4's, I have conssidered it, but than started leaning back on the Loopy 1.5-5, but cant decide on CMR-2 or TMR reticle. I used to have one with a SPR reticle, and sold it, now I wish that was a option, again should have never sold it!!!!

Most of my other scopes were low to mid-range optics, so comparing the TR24 to them is not fair. There are so many great options out there it is hard to choose. For me, the simple (always on) triangle on a post is what I liked about the TR24.

Novocaine
02-05-2011, 00:16
I have to disagree with you there. In all the CQB drills I have done I am just as fast with my scopes on 1x as I am with my RDS sights. The only advantage to the RDS is form awkward firing positions.
I’m not sure if we disagree. But I would broaden “awkward” into “imperfect” firing positions. Telescopic sights require centering of the eye within exit pupil and placing it at specific distance from the eyepiece and making sure you’re looking at the target through the scope (even though the “off” eye might be open). These things take time. You may take the same time when using RDS, doesn’t mean you have to. If you’re deploying the gun hastily you may spend the rest of your life trying to get the proper cheekweld.

Red dots are parallax free. As long as you see the reticule that’s where the bullet is going. And you can see the reticule from a far wider range of angles and infinite range of distances.

Whenever I say “red dot” I should say “reflex sight”. Meaning collimating and non-magnified. Doesn’t need to be red dot per se. Eotech is powered by the laser, Russian Nit is powered by ambient light / tritium. As a class, at short distances reflex sights will blow away telescopic sights because you don’t need to worry about eye positioning relative to the eyepiece in three dimensions and about which eye sees what.

Whenever reflex sight becomes magnified it becomes telescopic. With the entire luggage attached. Red dot with a magnifier behind it is a telescopic sight. Abovementioned Leupold Prismatic is a telescopic sight, not a reflex. It comes with all the disadvantages of a telescope without magnification- the main reason people go with telescopes in a first place.


Also the problem with having two scopes on QD mounts is situations change rapidly in real life. For example in LEO work you may be on the perimeter one minute and then running up to the house to do a rescue on a wounded entry team member the next. There is no time to swap out optics. A better plan is to have a optic system that can handle near and far.
A better plan for whom?

I mean if there would be a sight that would handle “near” as well as reflex and “far” as well as magnified telescope it would be a no-brainer. When and if Kruger releases this thing http://www.krugeroptical.com/ko-tactical-scopes-next.asp it will be it but until then…

OP asked about HD and target work, seems like a civilian use. From my perspective of a civilian living in the city there aren’t too many scenarios that would involve shooting past 10 yards from a fixed position. Or any that extend the range beyond 50. These distances are ruled by reflex sights. Ability to take aimed shot while lying on your back at something 5 yards in front of you is infinitely more important than precision at 300 yards. And why make the rifle bulkier with a set-up you’re not going to need?

I agree that a low power variable scope is a better option if the objective is to cover the widest range of possible situations. When I live on a houseboat I take 16” FAL with 2.5-10X along.
Also magnifiers don't magnifier the dot. The Dot stays the same size. So a 2 moa dot is still 2 moa in a 3x magnifier. You just see everything bigger.
What do they magnify? Dot stays the same MOA size? So does the target.
Either I don’t understand you or you’re making my point for me. “It doesn’t magnify it, you just see everything bigger?” :) As in “this bullet doesn’t kill, it just makes them dead”?

Let’s go with your terminology. Say, the device makes the target look 3 times bigger. My point is that at the same time it will make the dot look 3 times bigger. Bottom line the target will be obscured by the dot precisely the same with magnifier as it was without. Hence I just don’t see how it aids in making RDS more precise. I agree about target ID though. But, again, this is not an issue for an urban civilian.