New "RDS" optic about to hit the market

[rob_s]

I def agree on the laser part, but my experience is that aperture sights are lousy darker conditions, especially with eyeglasses if you normally are a contacts wearer. My issue with the red dot is shooting groups at distance, and any deformation isn't an issue for me for HD style shooting.

Now a laser and good open sights like HD style on a pistol, as I have on my Benelli, would also be fine.

At indoor distances, indexing only the front sight on a target will get perfectly acceptable hits for most people. At one time this was taught pretty commonly, but I assume that since optics became so commonplace it stopped being relevant. It works especially well in very dark rooms with a weaponlight. And it even takes a bit of the holdover issue out of the equation!

But, as you point out, the RDS is also fine for even the most astigmatized at those distances, so it works just as well. I suppose one might argue that if I can't use the optic at distance, and there's a trick to using irons at close range, why spend the money and add the weight of the optic?

[Chuck Haggard]

At inside the house ranges I was shockingly fast with just indexing off of my cheek weld, ignoring the rear sight, and bracketing the target with the front sights ears, ignore the top of the front sight, the rounds at close range will hit where the base of the front sight sits.

[GJM]

In darkness, I just looked over the rear sight, to take the aperture out of the equation. Of course, if you are smart enough to know to do that, or use the optic tube (dot off) with the front sight, or other work arounds, it probably isn't important what you have on the carbine.

Without my eyeglasses or contacts, the laser is straight up the best solution for me in dark conditions. Or the shotgun with buck.

[Coyotesfan97]

I've never liked Eotechs. The reticle is too cluttered for my tastes. I like the single dot of the Aimpoint.

We had Eotechs on our Sage guns. The batteries were always dead because they didn't get turned off.

I have astigmatisms in both eyes. The red dot has always been clear to me unless the intensity gets turned way up.

Include me in the eyeglasses group. I must be a little OCD but glasses, gun, flashlight, phones always go in the same spot on the nightstand. It cuts down on the fumbling.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JMS]

laser

The ones who gripe about shape for nothing better than shape's sake will still pitch a bitch, once they shine their lazerz on a matte, diffuse surface and discover that they almost universally fall in an oblong or hourglass shape AND tend to bloom.

[Jeep]

I must be a little OCD but glasses, gun, flashlight, phones always go in the same spot on the nightstand. It cuts down on the fumbling.

Being a little OCD in those circumstances is a very good thing.

[Unobtanium]

Learned today that it's NOT an etched reticle.

[DonW]

Imagine an Eotech styled optic with an etched reticle that takes CR123 batteries and has clearer glass than an Eotech. 1 MOA dot likely.

Leupold is about to dump such a beast on the market. Astigmatism sufferers rejoice!

Was this at SHOT?

[Default.mp3]

Was this at SHOT?

I assume that this was suppose to be about the Leupold LCO: http://www.leupold.com/tactical/scopes/lco/

[LSP972]

My eyes often see the Aimpoint round dot as anything but round.

Could be because, with those tiny 2MOA "dots", in anything other than near-absolute darkness you gotta crank it up to 7+ to see the damn thing, and it blooms as a result.

I intensely dislike anything smaller than a 4MOA dot due to this. IMO, if you need the "precision" of the small dot, you need a telescope, not an RDS. I have 2MOA H-1s on mine and the wife's carbines; they work, but if I ever run across somebody local with a 4MOA example who wants to trade, and his/hers is in the same excellent shape as mine... done deal. No long-distance trades, because I want to be able to yank the 2MOA off of mine, install the 4MOA and go zero the sucker right then.

.