LPVOs in 2023 and beyond

[Nephrology]

So in the time I use to distract myself from my rapidly approaching thesis defense I've been diving into the optics world a lot more deeply than I have in the past, in part because they seem to be one of the few firearms accessories where deals can still be had, and good glass is never a bad investment of money.

Particularly interested in LPVOs as the next gun whose optics I am looking to upgrade is a heavy 16" AR-15 that usually wears a bipod. Currently hosts a PST II 1-6 which is fine for now, but would like a little more high end mag (1-8/1-10) on this gun in particular. Casually investigating 2-10 range optics; the Trijicon Credo 2-10x36 seems particularly interesting.

What is everyone using for LPVOs/what other optics have you tried in the search for the right low power optic?

For what it's worth, I have a Meopta Optika6 1-6 on one of my guns that I love. A reasonable review of this model can be found here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJoRfhUw53I&t=1s), though as a caveat, the illumination in the model reviewed in that video is much worse than the one I have, likely due to the difference in reticle. Mine sports a KDOT RD reticle with an illuminated 2 MOA center dot, which is not daylight bright, but usable vs. a dark background during the day. I would definitely not recommend any of the FFP models of the Optika6 as the illumination seems to suffer even more with those.

[shane45]

Personally I like 1-4 and 1-6. Once you start getting into the 1-8 and above, it seems you really split the difference in usefulness. What I mean by this is the reticle in the 1-4 is usable even if illum is off. On my 1-8, you better have the illum dot on if your below 3 or you really dont have anything useful as a reticle. So in my mind 1-6 and below favor close distance and usable to 500 yards or so. Above 1-6 and your favoring the longer range spectrum of usefulness. So I tend to put 1-4's on 5.56's and 1-8's on 308's.


Edited to add all my optics are FFP.

[dontshakepandas]

I've got some time behind the Trijicon Accupoint 1-6, Steiner 1-4 , Razor Gen 2 E 1-6, Kahles K16 1-6, Nightforce NX8 1-8, and Razor Gen 3 1-10. I moved on from all of them except for the Razor 1-10, which is currently on my upper with a Centurion Arms Recce barrel. Everything else I've actually switched to an Aimpoint T2 + Magnifier in Unity mounts.

I really like the Razor 1-10, but haven't had a lot of time behind it yet. Out of everything I've tried it gives me the best combination of quick shots up close and shooting at a distance. Sounds like it would be a great option for you if your budget allows it.

[joshs]

So in the time I use to distract myself from my rapidly approaching thesis defense I've been diving into the optics world a lot more deeply than I have in the past, in part because they seem to be one of the few firearms accessories where deals can still be had, and good glass is never a bad investment of money.

Particularly interested in LPVOs as the next gun whose optics I am looking to upgrade is a heavy 16" AR-15 that usually wears a bipod. Currently hosts a PST II 1-6 which is fine for now, but would like a little more high end mag (1-8/1-10) on this gun in particular. Casually investigating 2-10 range optics; the Trijicon Credo 2-10x36 seems particularly interesting.

What is everyone using for LPVOs/what other optics have you tried in the search for the right low power optic?

For what it's worth, I have a Meopta Optika6 1-6 on one of my guns that I love. A reasonable review of this model can be found here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJoRfhUw53I&t=1s), though as a caveat, the illumination in the model reviewed in that video is much worse than the one I have, likely due to the difference in reticle. Mine sports a KDOT RD reticle with an illuminated 2 MOA center dot, which is not daylight bright, but usable vs. a dark background during the day. I would definitely not recommend any of the FFP models of the Optika6 as the illumination seems to suffer even more with those.

I've found that I prefer LPVOs that prioritize 1x effectiveness like you PST II. The small objective on LPVOs is limiting if you spend a lot of time on higher magnification. The 1-6 Razor is still my favorite carbine optic.

For a more precision oriented AR, I prefer running a larger magnification optic (with a correspondingly larger objective) and an offset red dot instead of the larger magnification LPVOs. This setup can end up at approximately the same overall weight as a larger LPVO with more capability. I'm currently using a US Optics TS-12x, but the compact nature of this scope requires some work if you want to mount an offset red dot off of the receiver. I'm using some Vortex extra high rings and an Arisaka offset dot mount (with a little bit of one corner filed off to eliminate interference between the mount and the Vortex rings). Using a mount with a provision for dot mounting would eliminate this problem.

[DamonL]

Because you are using a heavy gun with a bipod, I am also going to suggest looking at a higher magnification scope with an offset sight. It will take advantage of the capability of the rifle better. I am working on a project like this now. I bought a second hand Bushnell LRTSi 3-12x44 scope. The advantage is the scope is a real long range scope with more magnification and FFP. Different than the LPVO which you already have. I would also consider looking at scopes with a higher top-end magnification than the Credo you are looking at now.

I searched for SPR info and I think I found your rifle in this thread.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?41793-SPRs-Mk12s-Recces-SDMRs-and-SAM-Rs-oh-my!

So consider an SPR type optic.

[theJanitor]

I've actually switched to an Aimpoint T2 + Magnifier in Unity mounts.


I just did the same, but with an EXPS and a G33. I like it more than the 1-4x ive had in the past. I might skip the LPVO for my current needs

[John Hearne]

For what it's worth, I have a Meopta Optika6 1-6 on one of my guns that I love. A reasonable review of this model can be found here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJoRfhUw53I&t=1s), though as a caveat, the illumination in the model reviewed in that video is much worse than the one I have, likely due to the difference in reticle. Mine sports a KDOT RD reticle with an illuminated 2 MOA center dot, which is not daylight bright, but usable vs. a dark background during the day. I would definitely not recommend any of the FFP models of the Optika6 as the illumination seems to suffer even more with those.

I wonder how the more expensive Meopta 1-6 is - the R2 which runs closer to $1400. I don't need a reticle that allows me to shoot to 600 yards. I want to be able to see better and don't want a cluttered view. If the R2 with KDOT2 reticle is daylight visible then it seems compelling to me.

https://www.meoptasportsoptics.eu/en/produkt/meostar-r2-1-6x24-rd/mr-7666_974/

[Nephrology]

I wonder how the more expensive Meopta 1-6 is - the R2 which runs closer to $1400. I don't need a reticle that allows me to shoot to 600 yards. I want to be able to see better and don't want a cluttered view. If the R2 with KDOT2 reticle is daylight visible then it seems compelling to me.

https://www.meoptasportsoptics.eu/en/produkt/meostar-r2-1-6x24-rd/mr-7666_974/

I'm somewhat interested in the R2 myself. If I remember correctly the R2 1-6 is daylight bright from the little I've been able to find online. I have the Meopta ZD 1-4 which is absolutely daylight bright. As bright or brighter than my Aimpoint PRO on the 2nd to highest setting. Assuming they share the same reticle illumination tech it will be good to go, but worth doing your homework before purchasing.

The ZD1-4 has exceptional glass - clearly better than the Optika6 which is no slouch, so I imagine the R2 has similarly good clarity. That said at the $1500 ish price point you are competing with the Razor IIe, which seems pretty hard to beat.


Because you are using a heavy gun with a bipod, I am also going to suggest looking at a higher magnification scope with an offset sight. It will take advantage of the capability of the rifle better. I am working on a project like this now. I bought a second hand Bushnell LRTSi 3-12x44 scope. The advantage is the scope is a real long range scope with more magnification and FFP. Different than the LPVO which you already have. I would also consider looking at scopes with a higher top-end magnification than the Credo you are looking at now.

I searched for SPR info and I think I found your rifle in this thread.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?41793-SPRs-Mk12s-Recces-SDMRs-and-SAM-Rs-oh-my!

So consider an SPR type optic.

Yup, I'm pretty sure I've posted this rifle in that thread. It's the heavier of the two.

I've definitely thought about going with a higher mag scope and using an offset RDS for true 1x. I've been poking around for candidates - the trijicon Credo 2-10x36 so far is the most appealing (FFP, illuminated, 23oz). Would be nice to get the mag up to 15 or so on the higher end but seems hard to do without going with a much heavier or much more expensive scope.


I've got some time behind the Trijicon Accupoint 1-6, Steiner 1-4 , Razor Gen 2 E 1-6, Kahles K16 1-6, Nightforce NX8 1-8, and Razor Gen 3 1-10. I moved on from all of them except for the Razor 1-10, which is currently on my upper with a Centurion Arms Recce barrel. Everything else I've actually switched to an Aimpoint T2 + Magnifier in Unity mounts.

What do you like about the aimpoint + magnifier combo? what power magnifier are you using? This is something I've thought about doing for one of my SBRs which currently has a 30mm PRO.

[Default.mp3]

What do you like about the aimpoint + magnifier combo? what power magnifier are you using? This is something I've thought about doing for one of my SBRs which currently has a 30mm PRO.RDS is typically going to be faster than an LPVO overall unless you put in some serious time with LPVOs, once you throw in unorthodox shooting positions that make getting into the optimal head position much more difficult. There's also the ability to remove the magnifier and swap it between different guns, removing it to use as a monocular, or to make the gun a little lighter. If the emphasis is on unmagnified shooting, I think there's a strong argument for it. For true mixed use, a magnifier will suffer from lack of reticle (usually, though there are newer RDSes and HWSes that will have options that provide some level of hold over) and poorer light transmission (since the sight picture will have to pass through the RDS/HWS first to begin with).

[dontshakepandas]

What do you like about the aimpoint + magnifier combo? what power magnifier are you using? This is something I've thought about doing for one of my SBRs which currently has a 30mm PRO.

I'm using the Aimpoint 3x-C magnifier. I've tried the "military" 3xmag-1 with the same setup and didn't find enough advantage (or really any) to justify the additional cost.

I like that I get true red dot capabilities with the added ability to see and identify further. I've had some of the best LPVOs and even the ones with the most generous eye box just can't compete with an Aimpoint when it comes to weird firing positions where you may not be able to get your head lined up perfectly. The magnifier flipping to the center instead of off to the side is a game changer to me. Other than the additional weight, you don't notice its there like you do with flip to side mounts that affect the balance of the gun and your field of view.

The setup is a bit lighter than even the lightest LPVO + mount setups, and I can pop the magnifier off to shave more weight if I won't need it AND includes BUIS (although I run a fixed front instead of the built in front). It also gives me the ability to share one magnifier across multiple guns, although I'll probably buy another at some point.

It obviously won't be as good at ranging as a scope with a reticle designed for that, but I live in a mostly urban setting where I'm very unlikely to have to engage anything past 100 yards.

[Nephrology]

I'm using the Aimpoint 3x-C magnifier. I've tried the "military" 3xmag-1 with the same setup and didn't find enough advantage (or really any) to justify the additional cost.

I like that I get true red dot capabilities with the added ability to see and identify further. I've had some of the best LPVOs and even the ones with the most generous eye box just can't compete with an Aimpoint when it comes to weird firing positions where you may not be able to get your head lined up perfectly. The magnifier flipping to the center instead of off to the side is a game changer to me. Other than the additional weight, you don't notice its there like you do with flip to side mounts that affect the balance of the gun and your field of view.

The setup is a bit lighter than even the lightest LPVO + mount setups, and I can pop the magnifier off to shave more weight if I won't need it AND includes BUIS (although I run a fixed front instead of the built in front). It also gives me the ability to share one magnifier across multiple guns, although I'll probably buy another at some point.

It obviously won't be as good at ranging as a scope with a reticle designed for that, but I live in a mostly urban setting where I'm very unlikely to have to engage anything past 100 yards.

With that in mind, what do you feel the Vortex 1-10 offers that the other scopes you mention do not (beyond the obvious 10x high end mag, I guess)

[joshs]

I've definitely thought about going with a higher mag scope and using an offset RDS for true 1x. I've been poking around for candidates - the trijicon Credo 2-10x36 so far is the most appealing (FFP, illuminated, 23oz). Would be nice to get the mag up to 15 or so on the higher end but seems hard to do without going with a much heavier or much more expensive scope.

The Athlon Midas Tac 4-16x44 fits most of your criteria, but it isn't illuminated. If you want an illuminated scope, then there are definitely some cost/weight penalties in that magnification range.

[Mitch]

Has anyone used both a PST gen 2 1-6 and a Razor? Is the Razor really worth 2.5x more?

[dontshakepandas]

With that in mind, what do you feel the Vortex 1-10 offers that the other scopes you mention do not (beyond the obvious 10x high end mag, I guess)

I think it just does the best job of combining usability at 1x and 6x or higher. Since that gun is my "longer ranged" focused gun I prefer the FFP reticle for the ability to use it at any magnification, but it also gives up VERY little at 1x especially with the illumination on. I cross shopped the Nightforce ATACR 1-8, but never haven't shot with it. I picked the Razor for the extra magnification, lower cost, and finer aiming point. For a 5.56 gun I really don't need more magnification than 10x, so being able to have that along with the 1x performance of the 1-6 model was pretty appealing.

For my use, I wasn't comparing the Razor 1-10 directly with the Kahles and Razor though. If I was the primary use case was going to be 1x running and gunning type use I would prefer to go with a SFP reticle and something that weighs a little less. Ultimately those options got beat out by the RDS + magnifier and not the Razor 1-10 since I would use them for different purposes. That said, the only place I feel like the Razor 1-10 really loses out at 1x is with no illumination so you really aren't giving up much with that choice if the extra few ounces doesn't bother you.

[joshs]

Has anyone used both a PST gen 2 1-6 and a Razor? Is the Razor really worth 2.5x more?

The PST gen 2 is certainly the better value. The Razor is a little bit "flatter" on 1x with better FOV and a little clearer. The Razor also has a longer track record from a durability standpoint, but I haven't heard of many problems with the PST Gen 2s. That said, I still have the Razor Gen IIE and I sold the PST, so . . .

[Nephrology]

The PST gen 2 is certainly the better value. The Razor is a little bit "flatter" on 1x with better FOV and a little clearer. The Razor also has a longer track record from a durability standpoint, but I haven't heard of many problems with the PST Gen 2s. That said, I still have the Razor Gen IIE and I sold the PST, so . . .

Durability would be the biggest reason to upgrade from the PST line for me. That said, I just got a PST 3-15x44 in from Europtic (on sale for $600) and they can build a really build scope in the Phillipines... my only concerns re:durability come from reading too much Snipershide, where seemingly every scope manages to break eventually.

[joshs]

Durability would be the biggest reason to upgrade from the PST line for me. That said, I just got a PST 3-15x44 in from Europtic (on sale for $600) and they can build a really build scope in the Phillipines... my only concerns re:durability come from reading too much Snipershide, where seemingly every scope manages to break eventually.

That's a great deal on the 3-15. I was going to suggest that in addition to the Athlon, but I don't have any experience with the 3-15 (just the 1-6 and 5-25).

[Nephrology]

That's a great deal on the 3-15. I was going to suggest that in addition to the Athlon, but I don't have any experience with the 3-15 (just the 1-6 and 5-25).

I was really curious to try the Meopta Optika6 3-18 as SportsOptics have the MRAD FFP in stock for ~$650 after their discount but I don't have a gun I can justify buying it for :P

I did briefly consider the PST II for the 16" AR but it would be a porker with an offset dot. I do appreciate that the gun handles very well with the PST 1-6 on it, even with bipod. Wouldn't want any replacement optic(s) to be substantially heavier.

[joshs]

I was really curious to try the Meopta Optika6 3-18 as SportsOptics have the MRAD FFP in stock for ~$650 after their discount but I don't have a gun I can justify buying it for :P

I did briefly consider the PST II for the 16" AR but it would be a porker with an offset dot. I do appreciate that the gun handles very well with the PST 1-6 on it, even with bipod. Wouldn't want any replacement optic(s) to be substantially heavier.

That's why I like the US Optics TS-12. It's light and compact, so it doesn't completely change the handling of a relatively light weight carbine.

[Nephrology]

That's why I like the US Optics TS-12. It's light and compact, so it doesn't completely change the handling of a relatively light weight carbine.

It's priced very competitively... how does it compare vs. the trijicon?

[theJanitor]

Yesterday, I was with my brother, running rifles. I've got exps3-0 and a G33 on unity mounts. He's trying out a gen2 Huey with an aimpoint magnifier on a Larue FTS. The overall footprint of the Unity FTC is so good in comparison. And the view from behind the rifle is clean and uncluttered. I don't think I'd like to run a magnifier in any other mount except the Unity

[Mitch]

Thanks joshs and Nephrology

Another question for anyone. What’s the hotness for a mount on an AR-15? Don’t care about QD, light weight would be a plus.

[Default.mp3]

Thanks @joshs (https://pistol-forum.com/member.php?u=15) and @Nephrology (https://pistol-forum.com/member.php?u=1559)

Another question for anyone. What’s the hotness for a mount on an AR-15? Don’t care about QD, light weight would be a plus.Scalarworks, Geissele/Reptilia, Spuhr, Badger Ordnance, and Unity Tactical are what come to mind for the current Gucci shit.

[Kram]

Thanks joshs and Nephrology

Another question for anyone. What’s the hotness for a mount on an AR-15? Don’t care about QD, light weight would be a plus.

I am a huge fan of Scalarworks mounts. Definitely the hotness :cool:

https://scalarworks.com

[dontshakepandas]

Thanks joshs and Nephrology

Another question for anyone. What’s the hotness for a mount on an AR-15? Don’t care about QD, light weight would be a plus.

I like the Badger C1 1.7” mounts, but you can’t go wrong with Scalarworks either.

[NH Shooter]

I'm such a Fudd.

I'm now running a 3-9x40mm Trijicon with a set of MI offset folding irons and calling it good. The scope is bright and clear, and perhaps a RMR in an Arisaka offset mount is in my future. At 17 ounces and under $700 for the scope, I'm happy.

https://i.ibb.co/9t2Wx7s/credo-1.jpg


https://i.ibb.co/pxGCkSg/credo-3.jpg


https://i.ibb.co/gthcVgw/credo-4.jpg


https://i.ibb.co/ph9JDpd/ss410-1.jpg


https://i.ibb.co/Hr2TXrw/credo-2.jpg


https://i.ibb.co/cwhpFZH/B4-DB05-C5-70-A4-4711-B8-E2-8-F5993124-AB9.jpg

[Monty_dial]

OP, I spent years with a Steiner 1-4 and thought it was good glass. I found that it was not that much “slower” for target acquisition. Ultimately I went back to red dot as I simply did not “use” the scope to it’s capability. It’s all about the mission, as John Lovell says.....we will be in or around structures or vehicles. Good luck with thesis!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nephrology]

Thanks joshs and Nephrology

Another question for anyone. What’s the hotness for a mount on an AR-15? Don’t care about QD, light weight would be a plus.

For less Gucci purposes, I have been happy with the Warne XSKEL mounts. I don't know how good their QD models are, but their fixed mounts are quite nice for the money.

[SouthNarc]

Any advice on the best magnifier to use with an Aimpoint T2? I've been thinking about getting into LPVOs but the time for training is daunting.

[DI1]

Any advice on the best magnifier to use with an Aimpoint T2? I've been thinking about getting into LPVOs but the time for training is daunting.

The Eotech G33 magnifier is much better glass and cheaper than the Aimpoint magnifier.

Vortex is another option, Defoor likes his, but I have no time on one.

[Default.mp3]

Any advice on the best magnifier to use with an Aimpoint T2? I've been thinking about getting into LPVOs but the time for training is daunting.I used an EOTech G33 with a T-2 & GDI MT6-OSM (which is lower 1/3rd) for awhile, and it was quite serviceable, though the inability to center the dot in the magnifier sight picture was annoying (though didn't actually hurt it much). I am currently using a Scalarworks with the CompM5 and 3XMag-1 at 1.93", and it seems to work just fine, I feel the 3XMag-1 has better clarity and color than the G33. I skipped trying out the 3X-C specifically because it has shorter eye relief on paper, and I run my stock all the way out on an A5 RE; I also coonfingered a 6XMag-1, but the FOV seemed too small for my liking.

Most folks seem to be very happy with the 3X-C, so that might work just fine, but if not, the 3XMag-1 is certainly an option; best mount would probably be the Scalarworks in the appropriate height for your T-2, unless you have something compatible with the Unity for the T-2 (though I've heard the Aimpoint mounts themselves are no slouches). The newer EOTechs seem to still be in limbo (G43 & G45), haven't heard much about the Sig or Vortex magnifiers.

The folks counsel against the Aimpoint seem to universally be talking about the old 3XMag, which was released in 2005; the newer magnifiers are from 2016.

[theJanitor]

My g33 has adjustments for centering the reticle

[Default.mp3]

My g33 has adjustments for centering the reticleThe problem was two fold, the first being that the spacer provided meant that the Aimpoint sat either slightly higher or else slightly lower than the magnifier. The second was that the mount didn't allow for the magnifier to sit perfectly straight up and down when flipped to the center, it would go past the center a bit and sit slightly crooked, unless I shimmed the stop point for the flip-to-center. Thus, while I could in theory get dot to be in the center of the sight picture of the G33 using the adjustments on either side, the relatively gross misalignment between the Aimpoint and magnifier would cause shadowing on the sides of the sight picture when I had adjusted enough to center the dot. Alternatively, I could get a full sight picture, but the dot would be off-center. Again, annoying, but no real impact for the most part, as long as you just zero with the combination of the magnifier and RDS, and possibly accepted whatever zero shift came when unmagnified.

Also, I was going to bring up the Leupold D-EVO as a wacky alternative to a magnifier, but apparently Leupold has quietly discontinued it: https://www.leupold.com/d-evo-6x20-cmr-w-riflescope

[theJanitor]

The problem was two fold...

Gotcha. I'm using Unity Fast mounts for the Eotech optic and the Eotech magnifier, so it all works perfectly together. I actually wish the G33 adjustment knobs were harder to adjust. The diopter adjustment on the G33 is also appreciated by me

eta: I think I saw craig running FAST mount on his T2/Rattler, so I would think the aimpoint magnifier would be the ticket

[dontshakepandas]

Any advice on the best magnifier to use with an Aimpoint T2? I've been thinking about getting into LPVOs but the time for training is daunting.

If you are running a a rear buis behind your magnifier mount, it may be worth going with the 3xMag-1 for the increase in eye relief. I’m using Unity mounts with a built in rear sight so I can move the mount with the 3x-c towards the stock without anything being in the way and I have no issues with eye relief.

The difference between the eye relief in the two newer Aimpoint magnifiers is very small, and I haven’t noticed a difference in the glass at all, so the price difference just isn’t justifiable for me with that mount.

If you are going to go scuba diving with it or be extremely rough with it, the 3xmag-1 is more water resistant and supposed to be tougher.

The only other small advantage the 3xmag-1 has is that its flat on the bottom so you can use the buis in the unity mount underneath it. The 3x-c is round and blocks the sight so has to be removed for that.

[SouthNarc]

If you are running a a rear buis being your magnifier mount, it may be worth going with the 3xMag-1 for the increase in eye relief. I’m using Unity mounts with a built in rear sight so I can move the mount with the 3x-c towards the stock without anything being in the way and I have no issues with eye relief.

The difference between the eye relief in the two newer Aimpoint magnifiers is very small, and I haven’t noticed a difference in the glass at all, so the price difference just isn’t justifiable for me with that mount.

If you are going to go scuba diving with it or be extremely rough with it, the 3xmag-1 is more water resistant and supposed to be tougher.

The only other small advantage the 3xmag-1 has is that its flat on the bottom so you can use the buis in the unity mount underneath it. The 3x-c is round and blocks the sight so has to be removed for that.

Thanks buddy that's super helpful!

[littlejerry]

To the OP:
You need to decide what your primary use is. If you'll spend most of your time shooting at distance just get a 2/3x-10/18x. No 24mm 1x optic will ever provide the same functionality and ease of use at higher mags that a purpose built 32mm+ scope will provide. Similarly, no 2-3x bottom end optic will ever be as fast on short range targets as a good 1x.

Most of the new LPVOs are 20+oz which kinda kills it for me. 6x optic will still get you out to distance on big targets.

One of the newer LPVOs I'd like to get behind is the Trijicon Credo HX 1-6. It's a 19oz Japanese optic with the same type of daylight bright illumination as the Razor, and it's offered in 223 or 308 BDCs.

[Nephrology]

To the OP:
You need to decide what your primary use is. If you'll spend most of your time shooting at distance just get a 2/3x-10/18x. No 24mm 1x optic will ever provide the same functionality and ease of use at higher mags that a purpose built 32mm+ scope will provide. Similarly, no 2-3x bottom end optic will ever be as fast on short range targets as a good 1x.

Most of the new LPVOs are 20+oz which kinda kills it for me. 6x optic will still get you out to distance on big targets.

One of the newer LPVOs I'd like to get behind is the Trijicon Credo HX 1-6. It's a 19oz Japanese optic with the same type of daylight bright illumination as the Razor, and it's offered in 223 or 308 BDCs.

I think ultimately a 2-10/12 or something in the neighborhood with an offset RDS is the optic combo I really want. To be honest the specific magnification is less important than being light weight, FFP, illuminated reticle that doesnt suck. Not exactly in a rush to replace, the pst II 1-6 is a fine optic for now.

[littlejerry]

I think ultimately a 2-10/12 or something in the neighborhood with an offset RDS is the optic combo I really want. To be honest the specific magnification is less important than being light weight, FFP, illuminated reticle that doesnt suck. Not exactly in a rush to replace, the pst II 1-6 is a fine optic for now.

This looks like a cool option coming to market soon:
https://athlonoptics.com/product/helos-btr-gen2-2-12x42-dmr-scope/

Yes, it's a china scope. But this class of optics is sparse, and that reticle is bad ass.

The PA GLX 2-10 also seems like in interesting option now that they'll be offering a mil grid.

[Nephrology]

This looks like a cool option coming to market soon:
https://athlonoptics.com/product/helos-btr-gen2-2-12x42-dmr-scope/

Yes, it's a china scope. But this class of optics is sparse, and that reticle is bad ass.

The PA GLX 2-10 also seems like in interesting option now that they'll be offering a mil grid.

PA GLx was on my radar but not that familiar with the quality of their various optics. Have heard good things about the platinum line but less the other ones.

[KEW8338]

FFP is a must for LPVO's for me. Regardless if 6,8 or 10x. SFP really cuts into the effectiveness of what the LPVO is built for.

Properly designed reticles, adequate training on having a repeatable index on the gun, and vision control/discipline equate to speed on close targets.

The notion of hanging back up red dots off the gun to be "faster" is somewhat asinine to me. From an efficiency standpoint doesn't make much sense.

The current craze of "high mounts" also boggles my mind.

Cheaper LPVOs generally:
-Do not track as well as higher end (this can mean everything or nothing to you)
-Poorer quality glass
-Adjustments that a more a SWAG than clearly defined
-Chincy reticle patterns
-Durability
All those things can be overcome minus the durability.

[PearTree]

I like the specs of the new Athlon mentioned above, the reticle and FOV look better than the Credo. I wish scope makers would make a lighter option, 23-25 oz is ridiculous for a scope so small.

[littlejerry]

I like the specs of the new Athlon mentioned above, the reticle and FOV look better than the Credo. I wish scope makers would make a lighter option, 23-25 oz is ridiculous for a scope so small.

I agree, the creeping weight bothers me. But I think ultimately it's been market driven. Every scope "must" be bulletproof, have 40 mils of adjustment, track perfectly, have a zero stop and resettable turrets, an illuminated reticle, have excellent image quality, and cost less than $1000.

I still love my NXS 2.5-10 because its under 20oz which is rare these days. The downside is SFP and a less usable reticle.

[Nephrology]

This (https://www.primaryarms.com/glx-2.5-10x44-ffp-rifle-scope-acss-griffin-mil-reticle) primary arms scope looks kind or promising for my uses... 2.5-10x44, FFP, illuminated reticle. an offset holosun 507C on an arisaka mount woudl bring the total weight to just under 26 oz. Not much more than a Razor.

[Wayne Dobbs]

Any advice on the best magnifier to use with an Aimpoint T2? I've been thinking about getting into LPVOs but the time for training is daunting.

Aimpoint 3X-C; I like the LaRue LT-755 mount.

[bman940]

I have the Meopta Optika6 1-6x24 and appreciate the features it allows me to put to use. I have used the RD in carbine competitions and found when skies are cloudy or targets are dark, it is easy to pick up. I have the K-DOT RD and appreciate being able to dial in the drops using Strelok Pro for longer shots while predator hunting. I find the glass to be clear and function well in low-light situations. I have the MeoStar R2 1-6x24 RD on the way! I have MeoStar binos and they beat my SLC's in clarity and light transmission. I loaned them to a buddy who has EL's and now he has MeoStar binos in 10 and 12X. I'll let you know what I think of my new scope. Prob going on a JP, LMT, or Noveske SBR, not sure yet.

https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/dd363/bman940/IMG_7779.jpeg

[Screwball]

I picked up this, and used an Aero mount...

https://www.primaryarms.com/pa-1-6x24mm-ffp-illuminated-rifle-scope-with-acss-raptor-556-reticle-black

Now, completely different use than what the OP is looking for, being this is on a lightweight upper that will be added on my KE Arms polymer lower once I get the parts kit I ordered. Hoping to get it around 5 pounds.

The scope, I was pretty impressed with Primary’s glass. Clear as hell, and the FFP reticule is useable through most of the adjustment (1x and closer to that side... it is just a red dot). Can’t wait for spring, and to be able to mess around with it at the range.

[Clusterfrack]

That looks like a lot of scope for the money. A few key questions:
-Is the illumination truly daylight bright? In full sunlight, is it as bright as a RDS?
-Is it truly 1x, with no or minimal distortion?
-How is the eye box? Very forgiving at 1x? Usable while standing and prone at 6x?



I picked up this, and used an Aero mount...

https://www.primaryarms.com/pa-1-6x24mm-ffp-illuminated-rifle-scope-with-acss-raptor-556-reticle-black

Now, completely different use than what the OP is looking for, being this is on a lightweight upper that will be added on my KE Arms polymer lower once I get the parts kit I ordered. Hoping to get it around 5 pounds.

The scope, I was pretty impressed with Primary’s glass. Clear as hell, and the FFP reticule is useable through most of the adjustment (1x and closer to that side... it is just a red dot). Can’t wait for spring, and to be able to mess around with it at the range.

[CZ Man]

Anybody tried the Swampfox Arrowhead series LPVO?

I notice they have a 1-10x with a Mil reticle: https://www.swampfoxoptics.com/arrowhead-lpvo-series

Seems like that could be a good option and price if it works.

[Casual Friday]

What do you like about the aimpoint + magnifier combo? what power magnifier are you using? This is something I've thought about doing for one of my SBRs which currently has a 30mm PRO.

This post from Default.mp3 pretty much sums up why I like the Aimpoint+magnifier for my own use.


RDS is typically going to be faster than an LPVO overall unless you put in some serious time with LPVOs, once you throw in unorthodox shooting positions that make getting into the optimal head position much more difficult. There's also the ability to remove the magnifier and swap it between different guns, removing it to use as a monocular, or to make the gun a little lighter. If the emphasis is on unmagnified shooting, I think there's a strong argument for it. For true mixed use, a magnifier will suffer from lack of reticle (usually, though there are newer RDSes and HWSes that will have options that provide some level of hold over) and poorer light transmission (since the sight picture will have to pass through the RDS/HWS first to begin with).

I initially purchased the latest 3X magnifier from Primary Arms and an ADM swing away QD mount as a proof of concept setup before spending Aimpoint or Eotech money on their magnifiers. The Primary Arms magnifier ended up being "good enough" for my needs so I just kept it instead of buying the Aimpoint or Eotech. That isn't me telling you that the Primary Arms magnifier is "jUsT aS gOoD" as the Aimpoint or Eotech, because it is not, I'm just saying it's good enough for my intended use.

If you'd like to try a magnifier behind your PRO before investing in one and a mount, I'd be willing to send you my magnifier and mount to test out to see if it's something that you like.

[Up1911Fan]

Just ordered my first LPVO. Went with a Vortex Viper PST 1-6 MRAD. Plan on putting it on a 16" BCM. Need to figure out what height mount to go with.

[Nephrology]

Just ordered my first LPVO. Went with a Vortex Viper PST 1-6 MRAD. Plan on putting it on a 16" BCM. Need to figure out what height mount to go with.

Nice - you'll be very happy with it. They're very capable LPVOs - one of the best <$1k options out there, IMO, particularly given the true daylight bright illumination.

I've found any of the "standard" AR-15 cantilever mounts work just fine. My PST 1-6 is in a fixed Warne 30mm mount (https://www.amazon.com/Mounts-XSKEL30DE-Extended-Skeletonized-Picatinny-Style/dp/B00TZHU93W/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=30mm+warne+mount&qid=1613761320&s=sporting-goods&sr=1-3). If you're looking for QD, I've heard good things about the new QD version of the same mount. Also like the ADM Recon for the price.

Also - related- I grabbed a Holosun 507c for cheap on the AR15.com EE. Ordered an offset mount from Arisaka to go with it. Will trial this combo out on my big boi 20" gun just to see what I think of the offset RDS/scope combo. If I like it, I'll probably pick up a 2-10ish sized scope for the 16" and move the Holosun over with it too, or maybe grab a second offset RDS if I really like it that much on my 20" gun.

[Up1911Fan]

I have 2 507c 's mounted on pistols. I've been happy with them.

[Screwball]

That looks like a lot of scope for the money. A few key questions:
-Is the illumination truly daylight bright? In full sunlight, is it as bright as a RDS?
-Is it truly 1x, with no or minimal distortion?
-How is the eye box? Very forgiving at 1x? Usable while standing and prone at 6x?

Answering in the same order...

I’ll say maybe. In sunlit snow, which is pretty much what I got up here right now... not really (tried it after I saw your post). Grass, woods, and other foliage... it may be brighter. It is an etched reticle, with the illumination coming from the back... and the few times I’ve put it to 11 (highest brightness, and just regular indoor lighting), I went holy s*** in regards to brightness. The bottom two (1 and 2) barely lighten the reticle. If I were running it in normal daylight conditions... probably somewhere between 8 and 10.

It is pretty close to 1x. Only similar comparison I own is a Weaver 1.5-6x. It is definitely closer to 1x than that. Distortion... you notice some at closer ranges, but I really have to be looking for it. Actual 1x... I’d say no, but similarly, you’d really have to look for it to notice.

This is always the hardest one to answer... since people’s eyes are usually different. Depending on the mount/your vision, you should be able to get it positioned to a point where 1x and 6x have ample eye relief. If I yank my cheek off the stock on 1x, I do have a very small margin prior to the view going black... but I do feel if I wasn’t as worried about 6x, I likely could have given a little more relief to 1x. 6x is definitely useable standing... no idea prone (mainly due to it being cold and not being able to take it outside to play around). That being said, I may remount the scope/mount in the future... when I can see how it does as a complete package. I have the eyepiece just at the end of the receiver, so do have some play in either direction.

[bman940]

That looks like a lot of scope for the money. A few key questions:
-Is the illumination truly daylight bright? In full sunlight, is it as bright as a RDS?

I have used it on overcast days in competitions and found the red dot easy to pick up. On bright sunny days, not so much. Not a deal-breaker for me.

-Is it truly 1x, with no or minimal distortion?

It is. I am very impressed running it on 1X and do so on most stages. A very clear distortion-free scope.

-How is the eye box? Very forgiving at 1x? Usable while standing and prone at 6x?
I have not had any issues or complaints about the eye box. I have long arms and run with my stock fully extended, zero issues with fast target acquisition. The throw lever makes upping the magnification quick and easy. I have engaged 200-yard swinging targets from the prone position with zero difficulties.

[bman940]

That looks like a lot of scope for the money. A few key questions:
-Is the illumination truly daylight bright? In full sunlight, is it as bright as a RDS?

I have used it on overcast days in competitions and found the red dot easy to pick up. On bright sunny days, not so much. Not a deal-breaker for me.

-Is it truly 1x, with no or minimal distortion?

It is. I am very impressed running it on 1X and do so on most stages. A very clear distortion-free scope.

-How is the eye box? Very forgiving at 1x? Usable while standing and prone at 6x?
I have not had any issues or complaints about the eye box. I have long arms and run with my stock fully extended, zero issues with fast target acquisition. The throw lever makes upping the magnification quick and easy. I have engaged 200-yard swinging targets from the prone position with zero difficulties.

[Nephrology]

Have done a lot of meditating on the PA Glx 2.5-10.... it sat in my basket on their website for a while. Still haven't pulled the trigger.

The big hangup is glass quality - obviously a highly subjective feature and one that's hard to evaluate without having the scope in your hands, but from what I am reading online, it seems like the GLx 2.5-10 has glass that is at best as good as the PST II series (which, to be fair, is pretty decent). My fear would be buying the scope and finding out that it's worse - that would be sort of disappointing.

That leads me back to the Credo, but the lack of parallex adjustment and the 8 mil/rev turrets just further increase my resistance to ever paying Trijicon for one of their scopes...

[KEW8338]

Have done a lot of meditating on the PA Glx 2.5-10.... it sat in my basket on their website for a while. Still haven't pulled the trigger.

The big hangup is glass quality - obviously a highly subjective feature and one that's hard to evaluate without having the scope in your hands, but from what I am reading online, it seems like the GLx 2.5-10 has glass that is at best as good as the PST II series (which, to be fair, is pretty decent). My fear would be buying the scope and finding out that it's worse - that would be sort of disappointing.

That leads me back to the Credo, but the lack of parallex adjustment and the 8 mil/rev turrets just further increase my resistance to ever paying Trijicon for one of their scopes...

If you are leaning hard into the 2.5-10 world. Another option could be the Vudu 2.5-10 (https://www.eotechinc.com/eotech-vudu-2-5-10x44-ffp).

Why the desire for parallax adjustments and the 8 mil/rev turrets?

I am not sure I know of any scope that is under 10x with parallax adjustments. Most are baked in with it set too 100m(ish).

[Nephrology]

If you are leaning hard into the 2.5-10 world. Another option could be the Vudu 2.5-10 (https://www.eotechinc.com/eotech-vudu-2-5-10x44-ffp).

Why the desire for parallax adjustments and the 8 mil/rev turrets?

I am not sure I know of any scope that is under 10x with parallax adjustments. Most are baked in with it set too 100m(ish).

No desire for 8 mil/rev turrets - quite the opposite. Credo has the 8mil/rev turrets and I'd prefer 10 as that is a much more logical number to remember.

re: parallax adjustment, mostly to help resolve bullet holes, but I agree it's a relatively minor point. The GLx has a parallax adjustment knob so it's a ding when comparing the Credo and the GLx head to head.

I did look at the Vudu 2.5-10 but at 27.2 oz it's only an ounce lighter than the PST 3-15. The Credo and the GLx both clock in around 22-23oz which is much a more palatable weight, especially when you consider that I'd be adding another 3.5oz on top with the MRDS + offset mount.

[KEW8338]

No desire for 8 mil/rev turrets - quite the opposite. Credo has the 8mil/rev turrets and I'd prefer 10 as that is a much more logical number to remember.

re: parallax adjustment, mostly to help resolve bullet holes, but I agree it's a relatively minor point. The GLx has a parallax adjustment knob so it's a ding when comparing the Credo and the GLx head to head.

I did look at the Vudu 2.5-10 but at 27.2 oz it's only an ounce lighter than the PST 3-15. The Credo and the GLx both clock in around 22-23oz which is much a more palatable weight, especially when you consider that I'd be adding another 3.5oz on top with the MRDS + offset mount.

Resolve bullet holes? I am not sure I follow.

The 10mils per revolution. I can feel you on that OCD level.

Practically speaking though, I doubt you would ever be dialing that much (end user dependent). 8 mils is going to be 700-800m with a 14.5" shooting 77gr SMK. Given you have 12 mils to play with baked into the reticle. If I have a decent mil based reticle, I will not dial.

If you want to keep weight down on the gun...just ditch the red dot and mount..

[Nephrology]

Resolve bullet holes? I am not sure I follow.

Basically be able to see my hits clearly on a Shoot n C target so I am not bouncing back and forth to the spotting scope when i am zeroing, testing different loads, shooting groups on paper.




Practically speaking though, I doubt you would ever be dialing that much (end user dependent). 8 mils is going to be 700-800m with a 14.5" shooting 77gr SMK. Given you have 12 mils to play with baked into the reticle. If I have a decent mil based reticle, I will not dial.

If you want to keep weight down on the gun...just ditch the red dot and mount..

Yeah you are right that minimal dialing will probably be done with this scope. re: the reticle, I kind of like the griffin ACSS mil reticle on the PA gun even if it is a little bit busy. The Trijicon's reticle is simpler but seems to suffer in visibility at low power just from watching some videos on youtube.

re: the mrds, part of the interest in upgrading from an LPVO to a medium power 2-10 ish scope would be to maximize high mag performance with the scope and use an MRDS to make the gun RDS fast on closer targets. Otherwise I'd probably just stick with the 1-6 on the gun right now (the default plan at the moment)

[KEW8338]

Basically be able to see my hits clearly on a Shoot n C target so I am not bouncing back and forth to the spotting scope when i am zeroing, testing different loads, shooting groups on paper.

If you are working parallax as a focus, you may want to check your diopter setting. Parallax can/will adjust image clarity, but that's not necessarily the indication that it is set correctly.




Yeah you are right that minimal dialing will probably be done with this scope. re: the reticle, I kind of like the griffin ACSS mil reticle on the PA gun even if it is a little bit busy. The Trijicon's reticle is simpler but seems to suffer in visibility at low power just from watching some videos on youtube.

re: the mrds, part of the interest in upgrading from an LPVO to a medium power 2-10 ish scope would be to maximize high mag performance with the scope and use an MRDS to make the gun RDS fast on closer targets. Otherwise I'd probably just stick with the 1-6 on the gun right now (the default plan at the moment)

I think most 2.5-10 reticles are in that purgatory spot. The reticles are built for higher magnification, making it hard to use at the lower ranger nor do they generally include the benchmarks for making a FFP shootable at 1-2x.

I think there is this arms rooms optics arms race where you throw on an optic then you realize you can get more magnification, but now you need a mrds, but since you are using an mrds, why not throw more optic on. Next you are using a 3-15/18 with an MRDS and have missed the money.

Using 5.56 with 12-16" barrels with a decent OTM/HPBT/SMK round you are looking to effect things out too 800-900, and really tear things up from the 300-600 range. At those ranges, your magnification is likely going to be between 4-6x. So making sure the reticle is useable there is key. Nightforce released their new reticle for the ATACR for that reason. Unclutter the 1-2 mil area. because that correlates to 200-400m holds for engagements.

The trend for mounting offset red dots on guns boggles my mind. From a training perspective I think you will be better suited learning to shoot through your main optic regardless of what magnification its set at than trying to transition to an offset. From a longevity perspective. Offsets usually come off the firing side of the gun. So a right handed shooter, the optic comes off the right side of the gun as you have it mounted. Whenever you front sling to do anything, that offset MRDS is now a huge horn sticking out that will bear the brunt of whatever manual labor you are doing at at point. Ballistically speaking we now have whole new series of holds to worry about.....

Next comes the 12 oclock mount for a piggy back MRDS. This works, but everyone is in a race for higher and higher mounts. Of which I do not know why. So take a guy running a 2.0 mount, throw a MRDS on to piggy back, you are looking at a height over bore of 4-5 inches....Now that is supposedly the optic you use for CQB engagements

If that comes off as a rant toward you, I apologize not intended that way. Just spent the evening browsing instagram and am fired up.

[Nephrology]

I think most 2.5-10 reticles are in that purgatory spot. The reticles are built for higher magnification, making it hard to use at the lower ranger nor do they generally include the benchmarks for making a FFP shootable at 1-2x.

I think there is this arms rooms optics arms race where you throw on an optic then you realize you can get more magnification, but now you need a mrds, but since you are using an mrds, why not throw more optic on. Next you are using a 3-15/18 with an MRDS and have missed the money.

Yeah, I mean that's sort of the issue - there aren't a lot of lightweight medium power scopes with the features I am looking for. The rationale behind an offset or piggybacked MRDS + a lightweight medium power scope would be to do the of an LPVO but better, by sacrificing 1x magnification and using the MRDS for that purpose instead. If the combination ends up being substantially heavier than an LPVO (the 25oz weight of the Razor kind of being my benchmark) then there's no point.



The trend for mounting offset red dots on guns boggles my mind. From a training perspective I think you will be better suited learning to shoot through your main optic regardless of what magnification its set at than trying to transition to an offset. From a longevity perspective. Offsets usually come off the firing side of the gun. So a right handed shooter, the optic comes off the right side of the gun as you have it mounted. Whenever you front sling to do anything, that offset MRDS is now a huge horn sticking out that will bear the brunt of whatever manual labor you are doing at at point. Ballistically speaking we now have whole new series of holds to worry about.....

Next comes the 12 oclock mount for a piggy back MRDS. This works, but everyone is in a race for higher and higher mounts. Of which I do not know why. So take a guy running a 2.0 mount, throw a MRDS on to piggy back, you are looking at a height over bore of 4-5 inches....Now that is supposedly the optic you use for CQB engagements

If that comes off as a rant toward you, I apologize not intended that way. Just spent the evening browsing instagram and am fired up.

I think the MRDS would unique advantages when paired with the goldilocks scope I am describing, but I agree I don't know if I fully understand the benefit when paired with a 1-nx lpvo. Still, many seem to think they add value to them, so I'm willing to tinker around with the concept before I commit to a new scope. I'm definitely at a point where I'd rather wait and spend more money on an optic to get what I really want.

[KEW8338]

Yeah, I mean that's sort of the issue - there aren't a lot of lightweight medium power scopes with the features I am looking for. The rationale behind an offset or piggybacked MRDS + a lightweight medium power scope would be to do the of an LPVO but better, by sacrificing 1x magnification and using the MRDS for that purpose instead. If the combination ends up being substantially heavier than an LPVO (the 25oz weight of the Razor kind of being my benchmark) then there's no point.



I think the MRDS would unique advantages when paired with the goldilocks scope I am describing, but I agree I don't know if I fully understand the benefit when paired with a 1-nx lpvo. Still, many seem to think they add value to them, so I'm willing to tinker around with the concept before I commit to a new scope. I'm definitely at a point where I'd rather wait and spend more money on an optic to get what I really want.

If you go to this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8l0nlJfsaI) at about the 6 second mark. Watch the guy who goes right through the door and is using a SCAR. He presents the rifle, looks through his main optic, then cants the gun and uses the offset. If you spend anytime at rifle or 3 gun competitions, that happens all the time. Even guys that practice. You are splitting training time between two sighting systems. Then force yourself to make a snap call on which you are going to use.

If you make the determination to plus the glass up. Then why not plus the gun up to match the range the glass can give you?

Again this is the arms room logic train that will lead you to 16-18" guns, with 3-18s. That is a viable option. But that isnt the LVPO.

I think the prevalence of offset red dots is disproportionately represented by "influencers". Im sure there are plenty of main stream instructors that would have you believing as such

As for weight being a defining factor. Heavy things suck. But you can gym your way out of 2ozs. You cant gym your way out of bad reticles....

[Nephrology]

If you make the determination to plus the glass up. Then why not plus the gun up to match the range the glass can give you?

Again this is the arms room logic train that will lead you to 16-18" guns, with 3-18s. That is a viable option. But that isnt the LVPO.


Well, that's part of the equation too. The gun this scope would go on is already 16" with a heavy 416R barrel and wears a bipod full time, which is sort of the whole reason I'm interested in a lightweight 2-10/3-15 with an offset dot. It's a porker no matter what. Currently it has a 1-6 LPVO on it that is fine, but at 23 oz, leaves me wondering why not have a higher mag scope with a MRDS for only a few ounces more.

https://i.imgur.com/VzUFwPl.jpg

Wouldn't be interested in this combination on any of my lighter or shorter ARs.

[M2CattleCo]

I’ve been using LPVOs for about a decade *on certain ARs.

I see that the most common justification for an LPVO is to outfit an AR to be a one-gun, do-all solution.

I think an LPVO is a niche optic that’s mostly suited to games, hunting, and LARPing with a 5.56/300BO size AR out the reasonable end of it’s effective range on larger than varmint targets.

In their intended role, they’re all pretty good because you’re using a scope to do scoped rifle things.

[littlejerry]

I’ve been using LPVOs for about a decade *on certain ARs.

I see that the most common justification for an LPVO is to outfit an AR to be a one-gun, do-all solution.

I think an LPVO is a niche optic that’s mostly suited to games, hunting, and LARPing with a 5.56/300BO size AR out the reasonable end of it’s effective range on larger than varmint targets.

In their intended role, they’re all pretty good because you’re using a scope to do scoped rifle things.

I'd generally agree with this. LPVOs are indeed the "do-all" solution, but in reality they used in place of a red dot+magnifier, not in place of a higher power precision optic.

If you prioritize first round hits on small targets at 300-600 yards, an LPVO is not the right tool (even a 1-10x). Silhouettes are not small targets.

[KEW8338]

I'd generally agree with this. LPVOs are indeed the "do-all" solution, but in reality they used in place of a red dot+magnifier, not in place of a higher power precision optic.

If you prioritize first round hits on small targets at 300-600 yards, an LPVO is not the right tool (even a 1-10x). Silhouettes are not small targets.

I would say that is the biggest misnomer out there. Red dot and a magnifier vs LVPO

A magnifier let's me do red dot things, magnified .

A LVPO gives me a myriad of things I can accomplish.

What is a small target to you? 1moa?

The LVPO was absolutely a pair down of higher magnification optics on specific types of rifles. That's why the SR25, Mk11 and similar breed of rifles saw the transformation from using 3-15 down to 1-8s.

Largely because 4-6x is where a majority of "stuff" happens at.

[M2CattleCo]

I’ve taken LPVOs through a lot of shoot houses and cleared a lot of structures with them.

Outside of choreographed stages, they suck for actual CQ .

[LOKNLOD]

I'd generally agree with this. LPVOs are indeed the "do-all" solution, but in reality they used in place of a red dot+magnifier, not in place of a higher power precision optic.

If you prioritize first round hits on small targets at 300-600 yards, an LPVO is not the right tool (even a 1-10x). Silhouettes are not small targets.

That's spot on. The market for LPVOs has evolved into precision optics that you can turn down, instead of red dots that you can turn up. The top end on power continues to increase, the reticles keep getting more complicated, etc. etc. There's a marketing vs. demand self licking ice cream cone with features and its arms race on making the high-end power setup ever more.

All things being equal, having more raw power on the top end isn't a bad thing. But all things are rarely equal (and that equality drives the price into orbit).

I still like my Trijicon TR24 1-4x with the red triangle. It's a really good red dot with built-in magnifier. It's slick at 1x. It's handy at 4x. I can put a hurting on anything 0-300 in a hurry and much faster than just a dot alone once distance starts to outrun my eyesight.

For a more precision setup with longer distances, I have a 3-15x on a gun setup for that.

[Nephrology]

I still like my Trijicon TR24 1-4x with the red triangle. It's a really good red dot with built-in magnifier. It's slick at 1x. It's handy at 4x. I can put a hurting on anything 0-300 in a hurry and much faster than just a dot alone once distance starts to outrun my eyesight.

For a more precision setup with longer distances, I have a 3-15x on a gun setup for that.

My interest in the 2-10ish power scopes is for something that splits the difference, eg the USN Mk11 rifles with the NF NXS 2.5-10x32 power scopes. Basically an update to that concept with a similarly lightweight 2-10 power scope, but more modern features (mostly, FFP).

I keep going back and forth between the PA and Trijicon offerings and don't really love either quite enough to pull the trigger. From the prices I'm seeing, its about a $250 difference shipped to my door. I want to like the Trijicon product as Japanese glass always seems preferable to me vs. Filipino glass, but the Trijicon warranty and my general impression of the company is a little... disappointing.

[Up1911Fan]

What mount height does everyone like for LPVO's? I ordered a 1.93 ADM Recon for my incoming Viper PST 1-6. I'm wondering if that might be too high? I do want to be able to shoot the gun in more of a heads up stance. This isn't an SPR type rifle, but wondering if I should've went lower.

[joshs]

What mount height does everyone like for LPVO's? I ordered a 1.93 ADM Recon for my incoming Viper PST 1-6. I'm wondering if that might be too high? I do want to be able to shoot the gun in more of a heads up stance. This isn't an SPR type rifle, but wondering if I should've went lower.

For an optic that will primarily be shot on 1x in more upright positions, I prefer 1.93-2.04. The taller mounts allow the stock to stay in your shoulder without requiring you to tilt your head a lot to get behind the optic.

[M2CattleCo]

What mount height does everyone like for LPVO's? I ordered a 1.93 ADM Recon for my incoming Viper PST 1-6. I'm wondering if that might be too high? I do want to be able to shoot the gun in more of a heads up stance. This isn't an SPR type rifle, but wondering if I should've went lower.

1.93” all the things.

I think the weird sloping cheekweld stocks aren’t good for tall mounts because then that battery tube hits you in the jaw.

[Nephrology]

Well, saw a good deal on a Trijicon Credo 2-10 and pulled the trigger. Will be listing my PST II 1-6 for sale once it arrives, as I think I like my Meopta LPVOs a little bit more. Happy to be putting a more appropriate optic on this gun that won't weigh any more than my 1-6 does already.

[KEW8338]

IÂ’ve taken LPVOs through a lot of shoot houses and cleared a lot of structures with them.

Outside of choreographed stages, they suck for actual CQ .

If you go and shoot a "sniper school" with a red dot. You will find it sucks.

The learning curve for a LVPO vs red dot at close ranges are two different things. Red dots are way easier to learn, faster.

The trend is way too much "an LVPO is a red dot with magnification". Which can be the case. But you are only using a percentage of what that optic is capable of.

If you are willing to climb that learning curve, you will not find well built LVPOs as being crap to use at close ranges. The competitive and combative world see their high level use daily at close ranges.


That's spot on. The market for LPVOs has evolved into precision optics that you can turn down, instead of red dots that you can turn up. The top end on power continues to increase, the reticles keep getting more complicated, etc. etc. There's a marketing vs. demand self licking ice cream cone with features and its arms race on making the high-end power setup ever more.



One of the originals, that is still seeing use is the CQBSS with the H27D reticle. They were built that way for a reason. Nightforce did not build the ATACR or NX8 with that mrad based reticle in a vacuum. Nor did vortex build the reticle for the 1-10 in a vacuum.


1.93” all the things.

I think the weird sloping cheekweld stocks arenÂ’t good for tall mounts because then that battery tube hits you in the jaw.


For an optic that will primarily be shot on 1x in more upright positions, I prefer 1.93-2.04. The taller mounts allow the stock to stay in your shoulder without requiring you to tilt your head a lot to get behind the optic.

I have found that taller mounts induce more issues with the average end user than they help solve.

Benefits include:
-If using a top mounted lazer, it gets it out of your field of view
-If using with some types of inline clipons, it can help to keep everything centered
-If shooting with NBC gear on where you cant move your head. It gives you the clearance to make that happen

When people go to higher mounts, their reference points for the index of the rifle change, and depending on gun set up and body type, there is no tactile index. The amount of times you see guys with high mounts present the rifle, then bring their head upright is pretty telling.

The notion of keeping your head up is also somewhat foreign to me. Nothing in human nature tells us to stick our head up when you are about to get punched in the face.

In practical applications using an LVPO is again pushing to own mid range engagements. These are not "up right" affairs. The utilization of cover and concealment are paramount. Cover and concealment also doubles as kneeling and standing supported positions which are dictated to you. Your upright stance of 5'9" doesnt work when using a 4'3" wall. When you start going to supported positions, the higher the mount usually leads to inconsistent cheek welds, extreme neck positions and a lot of undiagnosed scope shadow. Because your head is usually floating off the back of the gun. This is true combatively, competitively and in hunting. No guy has ever won a 3 gun match by standing and shooting at 6" plates at 300m when there is a plywood barricade next to him.

[joshs]

I have found that taller mounts induce more issues with the average end user than they help solve.

Benefits include:
-If using a top mounted lazer, it gets it out of your field of view
-If using with some types of inline clipons, it can help to keep everything centered
-If shooting with NBC gear on where you cant move your head. It gives you the clearance to make that happen

When people go to higher mounts, their reference points for the index of the rifle change, and depending on gun set up and body type, there is no tactile index. The amount of times you see guys with high mounts present the rifle, then bring their head upright is pretty telling.

I've been running 1.93 mounts with LPVOs since shortly after Larue released the first one (I think it's been a little over a decade at this point), and none of those reasons apply to me. I get a very tactile index with tall mounts because I can actually keep my jaw clenched and the "pocket" created by my flexed jaw muscle (masseter) and jawbone provides perfect eye relief without running any type of riser. With a lower mount, I either have to relax my jaw some or tilt my head outboard, which I don't want to do.


The notion of keeping your head up is also somewhat foreign to me. Nothing in human nature tells us to stick our head up when you are about to get punched in the face.

I don't disagree, but I think it's a matter of degree rather than a categorical difference. I have about the same amount of head tilt shooting a tall mount as I do when I shoot a pistol. I have many thousands more repetitions with a pistol than a carbine, so the same position works well for me. It also keeps me from "looking through my eyebrows," which I find damages visual acuity to the point where sight tracking becomes more difficult.


In practical applications using an LVPO is again pushing to own mid range engagements. These are not "up right" affairs. The utilization of cover and concealment are paramount. Cover and concealment also doubles as kneeling and standing supported positions which are dictated to you. Your upright stance of 5'9" doesnt work when using a 4'3" wall. When you start going to supported positions, the higher the mount usually leads to inconsistent cheek welds, extreme neck positions and a lot of undiagnosed scope shadow. Because your head is usually floating off the back of the gun. This is true combatively, competitively and in hunting. No guy has ever won a 3 gun match by standing and shooting at 6" plates at 300m when there is a plywood barricade next to him.

I guess I don't really understand what you're getting at here. At 5'9" a 4'3" wall is probably about where a normal "standing" stance would place the shooter. The carbine doesn't come straight out of your forehead.

Tall mounts work much better for me (and many others) for barricade shooting. That is the exact reason taller mounts are gaining popularity in PRS/NRL, since both sports have moved towards requiring a lot fewer shots from prone.

1.93ish mounts have also been popular in multigun since I started shooting it in 2008. I think Horner had quite a bit to due with that popularity (and yes I know he runs a riser), but there are a lot of shooters who get benefits from tall mounts that have nothing to do with night vision or NBC gear.

By "upright" I'm basically referring to any shooting position where the stock sits in relatively the same place as when standing. For me, this is everything except a very stretched out crossed ankle sitting position or a very low prone (lower than a 30 round mag allows). I don't have to wear a helmet or plates, and I can see how that might cause issues between the rear of the helmet and the rear plate.

All that said, I've recently been playing with what would be considered "extra low" (1.26") rings on a more precision oriented AR, so I'm totally open to the fact that everything I know could be wrong. But, I do have a 1.93" offset red dot on that gun too . . .

[M2CattleCo]

If you go and shoot a "sniper school" with a red dot. You will find it sucks.

The learning curve for a LVPO vs red dot at close ranges are two different things. Red dots are way easier to learn, faster.

The trend is way too much "an LVPO is a red dot with magnification". Which can be the case. But you are only using a percentage of what that optic is capable of.

If you are willing to climb that learning curve, you will not find well built LVPOs as being crap to use at close ranges. The competitive and combative world see their high level use daily at close ranges.







I have found that taller mounts induce more issues with the average end user than they help solve.


They can be used effectively at close ranges but not are nearly as forgiving as a red dot. I’ve seen way too many training classes are that are tailored to the gear rather than reality.

Way too much attention is given to the average end user. They’re average because they’re not motivated and they’ll never be anything more than average until enough hardware is tailored for the average shooter until the above average are sufficiently handicapped to not outperform the average.

[KEW8338]

I've been running 1.93 mounts with LPVOs since shortly after Larue released the first one (I think it's been a little over a decade at this point), and none of those reasons apply to me. I get a very tactile index with tall mounts because I can actually keep my jaw clenched and the "pocket" created by my flexed jaw muscle (masseter) and jawbone provides perfect eye relief without running any type of riser. With a lower mount, I either have to relax my jaw some or tilt my head outboard, which I don't want to do.



I don't disagree, but I think it's a matter of degree rather than a categorical difference. I have about the same amount of head tilt shooting a tall mount as I do when I shoot a pistol. I have many thousands more repetitions with a pistol than a carbine, so the same position works well for me. It also keeps me from "looking through my eyebrows," which I find damages visual acuity to the point where sight tracking becomes more difficult.



I guess I don't really understand what you're getting at here. At 5'9" a 4'3" wall is probably about where a normal "standing" stance would place the shooter. The carbine doesn't come straight out of your forehead.

Bad approximation of heights on my part. The point I was trying to make was the shooter must usually conform to the barricade/cover/support etc. One of the most bastardized heights and seemingly ohh so common, Is the awkward height between kneeling and standing. It is when shooters are forced to be not-up-right, that problems seemingly emerge.


Tall mounts work much better for me (and many others) for barricade shooting. That is the exact reason taller mounts are gaining popularity in PRS/NRL, since both sports have moved towards requiring a lot fewer shots from prone.

1.93ish mounts have also been popular in multigun since I started shooting it in 2008. I think Horner had quite a bit to due with that popularity (and yes I know he runs a riser), but there are a lot of shooters who get benefits from tall mounts that have nothing to do with night vision or NBC gear.

I have not shot as many matches as I used too. Having shot with Horner. I do remember his highmount. But also his cheekweld riser. IIRC this was because he could not get a tactile index. This was a while ago, so I very well may be wrong. I also do not remember this being a trend on bolt or gas guns.


They can be used effectively at close ranges but not are nearly as forgiving as a red dot. I’ve seen way too many training classes are that are tailored to the gear rather than reality.
.

I am not disagreeing with that at all. Red dots are somewhat of the point and click solution.

My point is. If you want to red dot things. Then red dot. But when you get into LVPO's its a new ball game.

[M2CattleCo]

It is a new ballgame, but is it relevant?

The trade-offs are only worth it if the increased capability offsets it.

I don’t think there is really any justifiable civilian use of an AR against two-legged game where an LPVO is anything but a detriment.

[KEW8338]

It is a new ballgame, but is it relevant?

The trade-offs are only worth it if the increased capability offsets it.

I don’t think there is really any justifiable civilian use of an AR against two-legged game where an LPVO is anything but a detriment.

I try not to play the what if game. Im not arguing the use. I'm arguing about their employment.

Additionally my points are relevant to hunting and competition so...

[M2CattleCo]

Hunting, competition, and LARPing are where the LPVO excel.

[Nephrology]

Hunting, competition, and LARPing are where the LPVO excel.

Apparently the US military believes they're also pretty useful for designated marksman rifles (https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/10/15/socom-tango6-svps/)

[HCM]

Apparently the US military believes they're also pretty useful for designated marksman rifles (https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/10/15/socom-tango6-svps/)

More relevant is the Army’s procurement of a different Tango 6 LPVO as an ACOG replacement for the “direct view optic” on standard M4A1s:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2020/10/08/us-army-awards-sig-sauer-optics-major-contract-for-direct-view-optic/amp/

Of course it is worth remembering that these choices are heavily influenced by experiences in Afghanistan where longer ranges are the norm.

[TC215]

Hunting, competition, and LARPing are where the LPVO excel.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DLcoyHHRSk&t=215s

[M2CattleCo]

I’m viewing the LPVO from a civilian’s perspective.

[Nephrology]

I’m viewing the LPVO from a civilian’s perspective.

In that case basically every gun I own is purely for LARPing :cool:

I do sincerely think LPVOs are a lot more fun from a sportsman's perspective than a red dot. I find dumping ammo into nearby targets with an AR gets pretty old, pretty fast. Particularly in the current ammo climate...

[HCM]

I’m viewing the LPVO from a civilian’s perspective.

Positive ID and precision shots on partially exposed targets at shorter ranges are valid uses for both CONUS LE and some civilian users, though more so in rural areas.

LPVO's don't make RDS obsolete, they each have areas where they excel.

[Tokarev]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DLcoyHHRSk&t=215sViper PST. 30 yard shot

A job well done to the officers involved.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[M2CattleCo]

I saw him turn the mag ring before he took the shot. I wonder which way it went?

That 30 yard shot, supported, in broad daylight is one of those times an LPVO worked, but didn’t help.

[TC215]

I saw him turn the mag ring before he took the shot. I wonder which way it went?

That 30 yard shot, supported, in broad daylight is one of those times an LPVO worked, but didn’t help.

Yes, I’m sure the LVPO didn’t help at all with a hostage-rescue shot.

[M2CattleCo]

Yes, I’m sure the LVPO didn’t help at all with a hostage-rescue shot.


Lol. Whatever dude.

[TC215]

Lol. Whatever dude.


I’m viewing the LPVO from a civilian’s perspective.

[KEW8338]

I saw him turn the mag ring before he took the shot. I wonder which way it went?

That 30 yard shot, supported, in broad daylight is one of those times an LPVO worked, but didn’t help.

Looks like a clockwise rotation. So adding magnification.

Help?

Allowed the shooter to see a great more detail of his engagement area.

LPVO dont make a gun more precise or accurate. They make it EASIER to be more precise and accurate. It can also be quite reassuring to see the refinement of where you are aiming.

[M2CattleCo]

I know what they do. I started out with a gold ring Leupold 1.5-4 on a big pin Colt back in ‘04-‘05 or so. Have trained and used them quite a bit over the years.

At 30 yards in broad daylight.

This is pistol forum.

I need to stay out of the long guns section here.

[Up1911Fan]

I need to stay out of the long guns section here.

Agreed.

[rob_s]

In that case basically every gun I own is purely for LARPing :cool:

I do sincerely think LPVOs are a lot more fun from a sportsman's perspective than a red dot. I find dumping ammo into nearby targets with an AR gets pretty old, pretty fast. Particularly in the current ammo climate...

Who said anything about an RDS only being good for “nearby”?

About the only thing more satisfying than using a red dot to out-shoot the guy with the LPVO is using irons to do it. ;)

[WobblyPossum]

I saw him turn the mag ring before he took the shot. I wonder which way it went?

That 30 yard shot, supported, in broad daylight is one of those times an LPVO worked, but didn’t help.

I normally really like your contributions but, I’m sorry, that’s just nonsense. I have a hard time believing you don’t think the magnification helped the officer make his shot and you’re not just being obtuse because this goes against your argument. The officer went from sitting in a vehicle to exiting the car, setting himself up in a supported standing position, and successfully making a 30y hostage shot in about three seconds. I don’t know anyone who can guarantee doing that at the same speed or faster with an unmagnified optic. It’s got to be a guaranteed hit because if you don’t hit the right spot on the bad guy, you just shot a hostage, which I believe was a child in this case.

[M2CattleCo]

30 yards is a chip shot with an AR.

I train, train, train for shots just like that and that’s a shot where I would rather have my Aimpoint than my NX8. If he did indeed turn the mag up for that shot, it says more to me about the scope than the shot.

I’m not discrediting the merits of an LPVO, I just don’t think they’re as good inside of 50 yards as people want them to be.

I don’t think an Aimpoint is as good past 50 yards as people think they are either.

People tend to justify the gear they want as much as they skimp on the gear they need.

[joshs]

Who said anything about an RDS only being good for “nearby”?

About the only thing more satisfying than using a red dot to out-shoot the guy with the LPVO is using irons to do it. ;)

While it can be satisfying, for me, it was also very enlightening on the limitations of a red dot or irons. Our local 2 gun club is at a large range that can put together complicated "natural terrain" stages even for monthly matches. While it's pretty easy to hit a full size IPSC sized steel target in good light, engaging more realistic target sizes that are fully in shadow can become very frustrating when you simply cannot see the target when looking through your aiming device.

[joshs]

I’m not discrediting the merits of an LPVO, I just don’t think they’re as good inside of 50 yards as people want them to be.

I actually prefer a good 1x oriented LPVO to a red dot for 0-50 (assuming passive NVG use is not necessary). I can see more through the optic in more lighting conditions than I can with a red dot, and I don't have to compromise reticle brightness to be able to see an aiming reference when using a white light. The only downside for me is the weight.

[joshs]

Brian Costanza, the Oklahoma Trooper involved in 5 shootings, makes a pretty good case for the LPVO in this interview with Mike Seeklander: https://americanwarriorshow.libsyn.com/show-207-brian-costanza

I don't have the timestamp on hand, but it's right around the time where he describes ending the shooting where he engaged through his windshield.

[M2CattleCo]

Hell yes, an etched reticle is good with a white light in the dark. I ran an NXS 1-4 FC3G for a long time and that reticle is still my favorite. The NX8 has much better optical quality and is a lot better scope.

The trend towards 1st focal plane LPVOs has been a step in the wrong direction for the lower half of the mag range IMO.

[frozentundra]

Hunting, competition, and LARPing are where the LPVO excel.


I’m viewing the LPVO from a civilian’s perspective.

Perhaps LPVOs are good for hunting, competition and LARPing, but RDO's are only good for LARPing?
I'm not trying to be too snarky/serious/critical/argumentative here, more so lighthearted and amusing, so please don't think I'm taking myself very seriously. It's just my real life experience of using rifles in real life.


I've actually used my 'house' AR with LPVO to for varmint/pest control many times. I wouldn't have preferred a RDO for many of these experiences. I also use it to practice the 'zen' of long(ish) range marksmanship for recreational purposes-mostly for the pure fun of target shooting. To me, a LPVO is practically useful for hunting, recreation/competition, and general homesteading concerns. It's a practical rifle setup that could easily be used to defend against humans in an extremely unlikely scenario (to me).

RDOs seem most useful for battles against bad guys "CQB" style (to me). This seems more like LARPing than the other things (to me). I hope I never have to see it differently! In this scenario a shotgun may actually be less LARPy in a US civilian context, as Tom Givins has talked about many times. To me, RDOs have more utility on a shotgun or pistol than a rifle.

[Nephrology]

The trend towards 1st focal plane LPVOs has been a step in the wrong direction for the lower half of the mag range IMO.

Agreed. That's what pushed me towards the 2-10 power scope to replace the 1-6. IMO an LPVO is pointless if it's not built around the goal of maximizing 1x performance, which to me means SFP (or an extremely good FFP reticle I guess - Vortex 1-10 seems like maybe they've pulled this off).


Who said anything about an RDS only being good for “nearby”?

About the only thing more satisfying than using a red dot to out-shoot the guy with the LPVO is using irons to do it. ;)

Sure they can be used out to much farther, but the quality of my far vision + astigmatism makes a 2MOA red dot substantially more challenging to use on far, small targets than a 1-x LPVO.

[M2CattleCo]

Perhaps LPVOs are good for hunting, competition and LARPing, but RDO's are only good for LARPing?
I'm not trying to be too snarky/serious/critical/argumentative here, more so lighthearted and amusing, so please don't think I'm taking myself very seriously. It's just my real life experience of using rifles in real life.


I've actually used my 'house' AR with LPVO to for varmint/pest control many times. I wouldn't have preferred a RDO for many of these experiences. I also use it to practice the 'zen' of long(ish) range marksmanship for recreational purposes-mostly for the pure fun of target shooting. To me, a LPVO is practically useful for hunting, recreation/competition, and general homesteading concerns. It's a practical rifle setup that could easily be used to defend against humans in an extremely unlikely scenario (to me).

RDOs seem most useful for battles against bad guys "CQB" style (to me). This seems more like LARPing than the other things (to me). I hope I never have to see it differently! In this scenario a shotgun may actually be less LARPy in a US civilian context, as Tom Givins has talked about many times. To me, RDOs have more utility on a shotgun or pistol than a rifle.

Shooting varmints with a scoped rifle is solidly in the territory of scoped rifle things.

An AR setup for CQB and kept for the role of home defense is no more larpy than concealed carrying a pistol when out about your daily life.

Shotguns can be effective, but using a shotgun, especially a pump, when an appropriate AR is available is just poor decision making in 2021.

[rob_s]

Sure they can be used out to much farther, but the quality of my far vision + astigmatism makes a 2MOA red dot substantially more challenging to use on far, small targets than a 1-x LPVO.

which is also part of the fun.

The thread is already polluted with people using LE and mil justifications for their fun applications, so I'll leave it there, but the original point was there's this new-age misconception that RDS and irons are somehow only for close range shooting, which is ridiculous and was the point of my original reply.

I say this a long-time astigmatism sufferer that still remembers when RDS were new and "flattop" ARs without stainless-steel or HBAR barrels were hard to find.

want to get gooderer at shooting? spend some time with irons. I'm sure your gunfight will wait. ;) :p

[gato naranja]

Sure they can be used out to much farther, but the quality of my far vision + astigmatism makes a 2MOA red dot substantially more challenging to use on far, small targets than a 1-x LPVO.

That alone steers some of us to LVPOs.

For the person with one or two ARs that are going to have to do "everything," a quality LPVO becomes very attractive.

[Clusterfrack]

Hell yes, an etched reticle is good with a white light in the dark. I ran an NXS 1-4 FC3G for a long time and that reticle is still my favorite. The NX8 has much better optical quality and is a lot better scope.

The trend towards 1st focal plane LPVOs has been a step in the wrong direction for the lower half of the mag range IMO.

Tradeoffs... My two favorite optics are an Elcan Specter DR 1x/4x (SFP) and the Mk6 1-6x (FFP).

[HCM]

Hell yes, an etched reticle is good with a white light in the dark. I ran an NXS 1-4 FC3G for a long time and that reticle is still my favorite. The NX8 has much better optical quality and is a lot better scope.

The trend towards 1st focal plane LPVOs has been a step in the wrong direction for the lower half of the mag range IMO.

I agree.

FFP for DMR work but for a general carbine optics SFP is best.

[Nephrology]

Well, I just got the Credo 2-10 in. Mounted and installed with no troubles. Really like it so far - only issue is that the illumination of the reticle seems a bit uneven. Seems fairly "splotchy" - some areas of the illuminated reticle are not as well lit as others. Can't tell if this is just a fluke of the illumination technology or if I got a lemon - illumination is much more even on my PST 3-15. May give them a call tomorrow.

I also finally caved and ordered two more ACS-L stocks to finally ditch my last two "enhanced cheek weld" stocks once and for all. Considered the UBR as I thought it might balance out the bipod well, but couldn't justify $200 for a stock and frankly feel too lazy to pull off the buffer tube anyway. Swapped this ACS-L onto this gun temporarily now so I can play with the new scope. Also swapped a spare K2 pistol grip for the LaRue - definitely prefer the straight up-and-down angle a lot more.

Holosun MRDS is also in, but the Arisaka offset mount won't get here til Thurs. Excited to test this combo out. Hoping to get to the range to zero this scope early next week.

https://i.imgur.com/sxddQGH.jpg

[M2CattleCo]

That’s a cool build. If you ever go to chasing stringing issues check the bipod/rail hardware. I had an MCMR on a stainless barrel and the has block would sometimes hit a backer nut when I loaded the bipod too hard. I put a longer rail on it to straddle the gas block and it straightened right out.

[Nephrology]

That’s a cool build. If you ever go to chasing stringing issues check the bipod/rail hardware. I had an MCMR on a stainless barrel and the has block would sometimes hit a backer nut when I loaded the bipod too hard. I put a longer rail on it to straddle the gas block and it straightened right out.

Thanks! I've had that issue in the past with bipod adapters before, but this one is mounted far forward enough of the gas block that I haven't had any issues when shooting it in the past. The gun has a little less than 500 rounds through it with my LPVO - excited to take advantage of the new scope.

From reading around online it seems like the weird illumination in the Trijicon scope may just be a Trijicon thing. Real glad I didn't pay MSRP :P The illumination is functional at least so it doesn't bother me too much. Just annoying that my PST 2's illumination is much nicer despite being a less expensive scope. Oh well. At 23oz the scope really handles very nicely - it somehow feels even lighter than the PST 1-6 that was on there before. Definitely satisfied with the upgrade so far.

[theJanitor]

BCM rails have never been known to be stiff/tough. That's why some guys won't put a laser on it, as some hard knocks, tight slinging, or bipod loading will make the laser zero wander. They are light, fast handling, and comfortable to hold onto, though

[Nephrology]

BCM rails have never been known to be stiff/tough. That's why some guys won't put a laser on it, as some hard knocks, tight slinging, or bipod loading will make the laser zero wander. They are light, fast handling, and comfortable to hold onto, though

Planning on putting the MRDS behind the scope mount on the receiver for this reason. Gonna pull the offset BUIS off and probably sell them.

[Tokarev]

LVPO news you can use:

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2021/02/23/marines-field-new-rifle-optic-for-better-accuracy-hit-probability/

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[GyroF-16]

I agree.

FFP for DMR work but for a general carbine optics SFP is best.

May I ask why?
I’m just getting into this (contemplating RDS vs Magnifier + RDS vs LVPO for a 16” AR), and was under the impression that FFP was the ideal for a VPO due to no shift in zero when changing magnification.

Am I misunderstanding something? Or are there other, more important factors that I’m overlooking?

[Nephrology]

May I ask why?
I’m just getting into this (contemplating RDS vs Magnifier + RDS vs LVPO for a 16” AR), and was under the impression that FFP was the ideal for a VPO due to no shift in zero when changing magnification.

Am I misunderstanding something? Or are there other, more important factors that I’m overlooking?

You shouldn't have issues with zero shift (per se) at min/max magnification if you zero an SFP LPVO at max magnification. The issue with SFP scopes is that the reticle's mil tree/hashes and/or BDC will not scale with magnification, which means that practically speaking if you need to dial or use the reticle's holds you will be need to shooting at the highest power. This isn't a problem for a 1-6/1-4 because if you're shooting past a couple hundred yards you'll be at max magnification anyway.

FFP gives you a reticle that will scale as you zoom in/out, making the holds accurate at any magnification. This makes it a lot more useful when you have a higher/wider range of magnification, as you may want to use the reticle's mil hashes at say 7x to keep your FOV wider than it would be at 10x. This is a lot less useful if you have a 1-6 than a 2-10 or 3-15.

The downside to FFP is that reticle design tends to leave a lot to be desired when considering both high and low end magnification performance. Because the reticle scales with magnification and has to be useable at both ends of the mag range, often FFP scopes end up with busy/hard to see reticles at 1x (because they are made to be useful at say 8x), or they are cluttered and insufficiently refined (because they were made to be useful at 1x). Illumination also tends to be significantly less usable in FFP scopes, particularly at max magnification.

There are of course exceptions like the Vortex 1-10, but generally speaking, FFP scopes give you a reticle that is going to be optimized for shooting at the higher end of your magnification range. SFP reticles will be a lot more simple and provide great functionality at both 1x and max magnification, but you lose the ability to dial or hold with your reticle at anything less than max magnification, making the intermediate magnification ranges much less useful than an FFP scope.

Hope that made sense...I'm not the most seasoned optics guy so someone correct me if I made a mistake

[Tokarev]

May I ask why?
I’m just getting into this (contemplating RDS vs Magnifier + RDS vs LVPO for a 16” AR), and was under the impression that FFP was the ideal for a VPO due to no shift in zero when changing magnification.

Am I misunderstanding something? Or are there other, more important factors that I’m overlooking?In my experience with several different FFP 1-6 and 1-8 optics, the reticle is too small to see at 1x and too big for precise aiming at 8. Some scopes are better than others in this regard but they still have this not enough/too much thing going on. Add a tiny reticle and brightness settings that might not be bright enough even at the highest setting (combined with short battery life) and the optic looses its red dot-ish functionality.



Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[littlejerry]

Well, I just got the Credo 2-10 in. Mounted and installed with no troubles. Really like it so far - only issue is that the illumination of the reticle seems a bit uneven. Seems fairly "splotchy" - some areas of the illuminated reticle are not as well lit as others. Can't tell if this is just a fluke of the illumination technology or if I got a lemon - illumination is much more even on my PST 3-15. May give them a call tomorrow.

I also finally caved and ordered two more ACS-L stocks to finally ditch my last two "enhanced cheek weld" stocks once and for all. Considered the UBR as I thought it might balance out the bipod well, but couldn't justify $200 for a stock and frankly feel too lazy to pull off the buffer tube anyway. Swapped this ACS-L onto this gun temporarily now so I can play with the new scope. Also swapped a spare K2 pistol grip for the LaRue - definitely prefer the straight up-and-down angle a lot more.

Holosun MRDS is also in, but the Arisaka offset mount won't get here til Thurs. Excited to test this combo out. Hoping to get to the range to zero this scope early next week.

https://i.imgur.com/sxddQGH.jpg

I'm looking forward to your impressions after more use. This optic is on my short list

[Nephrology]

I'm looking forward to your impressions after more use. This optic is on my short list

Will certainly update. I believe TGS has one as well.

[HCM]

May I ask why?
I’m just getting into this (contemplating RDS vs Magnifier + RDS vs LVPO for a 16” AR), and was under the impression that FFP was the ideal for a VPO due to no shift in zero when changing magnification.

Am I misunderstanding something? Or are there other, more important factors that I’m overlooking?

Yes, you are conflating zero with reticle scale. There is no shift in zero with FFP or SFP.

With FFP everything remains true to scale so a BDC or MIL scale etc for ranging /holds is true at any magnification. On a DMR type gun that could be a factor.

On a general purpose Carbine optic like a 1-4 or a 1-6 I am pretty much just using it at minimum and maximum magnification.

[TGS]

I'm looking forward to your impressions after more use. This optic is on my short list


Will certainly update. I believe TGS has one as well.

To be fair, I don't know if I have anything substantial to add. My knowledge, skills and abilities with precision weapons/scopes is squarely unschooled. At that, it's my first "expensive" scope. All the other scopes in my life have been lower end Tasco, Vortex, Leopold, Burris, etc.

I find the Christmas Tree reticle to be difficult to use under any sort of pressure, as the tick marks are so fine that I have trouble differentiating and focusing on them. I don't think I'm going to be taking a precision rifle course any time soon, so there's a good chance I'm going to sell/trade it for something with a more pedestrian reticle suited for a hobbyist pleb.

Tl;dr: Without getting wordy, it works fine, but a $200 Vortex Diamondback does the same thing for me at 1/5th the cost.

[littlejerry]

To be fair, I don't know if I have anything substantial to add. My knowledge, skills and abilities with precision weapons/scopes is squarely unschooled. At that, it's my first "expensive" scope. All the other scopes in my life have been lower end Tasco, Vortex, Leopold, Burris, etc.

I find the Christmas Tree reticle to be difficult to use under any sort of pressure, as the tick marks are so fine that I have trouble differentiating and focusing on them. I don't think I'm going to be taking a precision rifle course any time soon, so there's a good chance I'm going to sell/trade it for something with a more pedestrian reticle suited for a hobbyist pleb.

Tl;dr: Without getting wordy, it works fine, but a $200 Vortex Diamondback does the same thing for me at 1/5th the cost.

Thats good feedback. I was curious if the .2 mil subtensions would be too fine for 10x magnification. That type of reticle makes sense, and is useable, at 15+.

It's always a tradeoff though. 1 mil is pretty coarse when you get out to 500+ yards. Especially with .223 you'll need some precise wind holds which is where .2 becomes really useful. I also started out dialing, so while I understand the benefits of trees, I'm just not excited by them. Perhaps the Trijicon reticle would be easier to use with a 0.5 mil grid.

You might look at the Athlon Midas Tac 4-16 if you want to trade down. It has a much simpler/cleaner reticle and weighs 24oz. Supposedly they track well and have good glass for the money.

[TGS]

Thats good feedback. I was curious if the .2 mil subtensions would be too fine for 10x magnification. That type of reticle makes sense, and is useable, at 15+.

It's always a tradeoff though. 1 mil is pretty coarse when you get out to 500+ yards. Especially with .223 you'll need some precise wind holds which is where .2 becomes really useful. I also started out dialing, so while I understand the benefits of trees, I'm just not excited by them. Perhaps the Trijicon reticle would be easier to use with a 0.5 mil grid.

You might look at the Athlon Midas Tac 4-16 if you want to trade down. It has a much simpler/cleaner reticle and weighs 24oz. Supposedly they track well and have good glass for the money.

That all makes sense, and with my current range options 300 is the farthest I can shoot. I'll take a look at the Athlon, thanks.

[Nephrology]

Thats good feedback. I was curious if the .2 mil subtensions would be too fine for 10x magnification. That type of reticle makes sense, and is useable, at 15+.

It's always a tradeoff though. 1 mil is pretty coarse when you get out to 500+ yards. Especially with .223 you'll need some precise wind holds which is where .2 becomes really useful. I also started out dialing, so while I understand the benefits of trees, I'm just not excited by them. Perhaps the Trijicon reticle would be easier to use with a 0.5 mil grid.

You might look at the Athlon Midas Tac 4-16 if you want to trade down. It has a much simpler/cleaner reticle and weighs 24oz. Supposedly they track well and have good glass for the money.

The half mil subtensions on the Credo 2-10 seem pretty useable to me. I don't find the reticle that complicated at all - at least no more complicated than the EBR2C reticle on my PST 3-15, which is very similar. It is very useable at 10x magnification, but below 5x it gets a little small, at least with how my diopter is set.

For something cheaper the SWFA 3-9 is supposed to be a nice option. I was considering that myself.

[littlejerry]

The half mil subtensions on the Credo 2-10 seem pretty useable to me. I don't find the reticle that complicated at all - at least no more complicated than the EBR2C reticle on my PST 3-15, which is very similar. It is very useable at 10x magnification, but below 5x it gets a little small, at least with how my diopter is set.

For something cheaper the SWFA 3-9 is supposed to be a nice option. I was considering that myself.

I wouldn't expect 0.5 mil to be too fine, but the tree is 0.2 mil on windage. How does that look on 10x on field targets?

[Nephrology]

I wouldn't expect 0.5 mil to be too fine, but the tree is 0.2 mil on windage. How does that look on 10x on field targets?

Will have to take it to the range to give you a full sense - will let you know when I get back from zeroing it next week. Hoping to make it out on Tues

[DamonL]

Looking at an LPVO that tries to bridge the FFP problems at 1x there is the Schmidt and Bender Dual. Don't look at the price.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2020/05/12/review-the-1-8x24-pm-ii-shortdot-dual-cc-the-warscope-from-schmidt-bender/

[Doc_Glock]

In that case basically every gun I own is purely for LARPing :cool:

I do sincerely think LPVOs are a lot more fun from a sportsman's perspective than a red dot. I find dumping ammo into nearby targets with an AR gets pretty old, pretty fast. Particularly in the current ammo climate...

Most of my rifles sport red dots or just irons.

I have a Viper PST 2.5-10 on one rifle. I sighted it in and it sat for...years, five years to be exact while I did pistol things and shot rifles and shotguns at pistol ranges.

I finally got an opportunity to get to a much longer range, and damn I loved shooting that optic out farther.

[Mitch]

So here’s another question. If I’m mostly going to feed a rifle m193/xm193 is it worth spending the premium for an LPVO with ammo that’s pretty crappy?

[M2CattleCo]

Training ammo is training ammo.

If you need to do things that require magnification, that ammo is fine for building reps but you will want something better to determine the capability of your whole rifle.

[HCM]

So here’s another question. If I’m mostly going to feed a rifle m193/xm193 is it worth spending the premium for an LPVO with ammo that’s pretty crappy?

Irrelevant.

LPVOs don’t let you shoot better, they let you see better.

[M2CattleCo]

If you decide you want something stiffer than the MCMR the BCM quad rails are super stiff.

They’re basically a tube like the MCMR with three rails on it. They’re still significantly lighter than most other quads.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-9SmJsbD/0/X2/i-9SmJsbD-X2.jpg

[pastaslinger]

The BCM quads are on par or even lighter than some heavy mlok rails like the wedge lock ones it seems

[Nephrology]

So here’s another question. If I’m mostly going to feed a rifle m193/xm193 is it worth spending the premium for an LPVO with ammo that’s pretty crappy?

What is a premium to you?

IMO for a 16" gun with anything heavier than a pencil barrel they are a good use of money.

You can get a like new in box PST II 1-6 for $500 on Eurooptic right now (demo scope). That's a pretty incredible deal for a scope that is (in my completely unqualified opinion) duty grade with a good uncomplicated reticle and daylight bright illumination

[Mitch]

What is a premium to you?

IMO for a 16" gun with anything heavier than a pencil barrel they are a good use of money.

You can get a like new in box PST II 1-6 for $500 on Eurooptic right now (demo scope). That's a pretty incredible deal for a scope that is (in my completely unqualified opinion) duty grade with a good uncomplicated reticle and daylight bright illumination

That’s a fair point and the exact optic I was considering.

I’m putting a 458 socom together for a deer gun. That’s going to get a PST 1-6 because it’s a hunting gun and just makes sense. My other AR is a 16 inch with a lightweight barrel. With a red dot I can hold 3-4 moa with m193 out to 200 yards. I was thinking about a second PST for the 5.56 gun as kind of a practice gun since 458 ammo is expensive even by 2020 standards, but the drop is so different I’m not sure how valuable that would be.

I realize none of this is much of a question now, I’m just thinking out loud.

[Nephrology]

That’s a fair point and the exact optic I was considering.

I’m putting a 458 socom together for a deer gun. That’s going to get a PST 1-6 because it’s a hunting gun and just makes sense. My other AR is a 16 inch with a lightweight barrel. With a red dot I can hold 3-4 moa with m193 out to 200 yards. I was thinking about a second PST for the 5.56 gun as kind of a practice gun since 458 ammo is expensive even by 2020 standards, but the drop is so different I’m not sure how valuable that would be.

I realize none of this is much of a question now, I’m just thinking out loud.

I'm not a hunter so I can't really comment on the 1-6 PST for your application, but IMO it's a class leader.

The other one I'd strongly consider would be the Meopta Optika6 1-6 SFP (I would pass on the FFP). Check out the reticles on Meopta's website - mine has the KDOT RD, which IMO is the best they offer for this model. The glass is much more clear than the PST II and IMO build quality is better. Downsides vs. the PST 1-6 : illumination is not daylight bright (PST's is). Otherwise it's a better scope in every way so long as you like the reticles they offer.

I will actually be selling my Optika6 soon as I just pulled the trigger on a Razor II-E (thanks CS Tactical), so if you're at all interested shoot me a PM.

[HCM]

That’s a fair point and the exact optic I was considering.

I’m putting a 458 socom together for a deer gun. That’s going to get a PST 1-6 because it’s a hunting gun and just makes sense. My other AR is a 16 inch with a lightweight barrel. With a red dot I can hold 3-4 moa with m193 out to 200 yards. I was thinking about a second PST for the 5.56 gun as kind of a practice gun since 458 ammo is expensive even by 2020 standards, but the drop is so different I’m not sure how valuable that would be.

I realize none of this is much of a question now, I’m just thinking out loud.

I think it depends on what type of hunting. Assuming shorter ranges based on the .458 cal. ?

The PST is a good optic but it’s heavy. Are you walking or hunting from a stand?

Do you need a 1x with a daylight bright dot on a hunting gun ?

Maybe for dangerous game at short ranges ?

The consistency/ carry over of having the same or similar 1-6s on your hunting gun and your training /defense gun is a potential benefit.

[littlejerry]

If you want an LPVO, buy one. It wouldn't be my first choice for a deer rifle. Not that it's not useable, but there are better and cheaper options if that's the primary use case. A Leupy 2-7 or 3-9 would work better in low light, cost less, and weigh less.

Of course you can hunt with irons if the conditions are right, and a LPVO is a huge step up from that.

[Mitch]

I think it depends on what type of hunting. Assuming shorter ranges based on the .458 cal. ?

The PST is a good optic but it’s heavy. Are you walking or hunting from a stand?

Do you need a 1x with a daylight bright dot on a hunting gun ?

Maybe for dangerous game at short ranges ?

The consistency/ carry over of having the same or similar 1-6s on your hunting gun and your training /defense gun is a potential benefit.

458 has more to do with regulations than being the best tool for the job. But whatever, it’s fine. I’ll be hunting from a stand. And yes, ranges will be mostly within 100 yards and absolutely less than 200. Your last point is what I was thinking initially, but I still wonder if the two are different enough (other than both being AR pattern rifles) that it’s a forced compromise that doesn’t make as much sense as I might like.


If you want an LPVO, buy one. It wouldn't be my first choice for a deer rifle. Not that it's not useable, but there are better and cheaper options if that's the primary use case. A Leupy 2-7 or 3-9 would work better in low light, cost less, and weigh less.

Of course you can hunt with irons if the conditions are right, and a LPVO is a huge step up from that.

Why do you say that about the low light? Is it something about the size of the lense or something like that? I don’t know a ton about scopes so I could be going about this entirely wrong.

[littlejerry]

458 has more to do with regulations than being the best tool for the job. But whatever, it’s fine. I’ll be hunting from a stand. And yes, ranges will be mostly within 100 yards and absolutely less than 200. Your last point is what I was thinking initially, but I still wonder if the two are different enough (other than both being AR pattern rifles) that it’s a forced compromise that doesn’t make as much sense as I might like.



Why do you say that about the low light? Is it something about the size of the lense or something like that? I don’t know a ton about scopes so I could be going about this entirely wrong.

All things being equal, a larger objective lens will gather more light and provide a brighter image.

[M2CattleCo]

A 4X32 ACOG would be a great deer scope. They gather light very well. 24mm objective lenses and FFP just don’t cut it if you’re trying to stay out as late as you can. You dial it back to 2-3X to get some light, then you can’t see the reticle at all so you turn on the illumination and the first visible setting washes everything out and you’re done.

There’s a good reason why a 2FP 3-9X50 with a heavy duplex reticle is such a good deer scope.

I’ve always loved a TA31 with the green horseshoe reticle.

[gato naranja]

I can't help but feel that LPVOs with illuminated reticles are too often tasked with an impossibility, in that they are expected to do rather more than they possibly can at this time (I believe that technology will eventually make an end run around the paradigms, but that is pie-in-the-sky for now).

We resisted the LPVO until we concluded that for us, the market offered affordable examples that came pretty close to the speed and usability of a red dot, coupled with the benefits of a low-fixed-power - say, 4X or lower - trad riflescope like we had previously used on short-legged carbines back in the day. In the end, something like the Viper PST gen II 1-6 is a good - though a tad heavy for its size - compromise for us and does what we realistically want it to do.

As target rigs they are not viable. As low-light scopes, they are useful only with the magnification cranked down low. As a substitute for a red dot, they are bulky and often have something undesirable about the reticle. Alas, there are no free lunches in the world of weapon-mounted optics. For a one-gun guy or gal, the LPVO can be a useful compromise, just like a 16" middy AR is. If the capabilities of a more dedicated setup is called for, then it would seem prudent to invest in a dedicated setup.

[KEW8338]

I am 100% FFP.

The decision to people usually becomes:
Do I want a 1x that can do 6/8/10x
Or do I want a 6/8/10x that can do 1x stuff...

Properly designed reticles (that being the key) still offer a high degree of low magnification power use.

You may have to learn a slightly different way to sight though. What I mean by that, is similar to using the bottom hash of an eotech reticle for your 7-10m hold.

[rob_s]

I can't help but feel that LPVOs with illuminated reticles are too often tasked with an impossibility, in that they are expected to do rather more than they possibly can at this time (I believe that technology will eventually make an end run around the paradigms, but that is pie-in-the-sky for now).


What do you mean? I just want an optic that can do both FFP and SFP, with a daylight bright reticule that has user-adjustable options for dot, circle-dot, and horseshoe, that has stadia lines when I want them and none when I don't, that weights <1 lbs with mount and all and costs less than $500?

:p

Ok, in reality, I'd take 2 of those. sub-16 oz mounted and true daylight brightness, and I'd double the price restriction.

[gato naranja]

What do you mean? I just want an optic that can do both FFP and SFP, with a daylight bright reticule that has user-adjustable options for dot, circle-dot, and horseshoe, that has stadia lines when I want them and none when I don't, that weights <1 lbs with mount and all and costs less than $500?

I can see the ad copy now... "The optic that does it all, designed for the gun that can do anything."

[Nephrology]

Now that I have my hands on the Razor.... I gotta say, my very first reaction was "Hey, this is pretty similar to the Meopta." The Razor is clearly the better optic, but the wide field of view, flat 1x performance, generous eyebox and optical clarity of the Optika6 I would put at about 80-85 % of the Razor's (I'd put the PST II at more like 55-60% of the Razor...). Illumination of course is where the Razor is a quantum leap forward from the Optika6, but in hindsight I am really impressed with Meopta for making a scope that gets so close to the Razor in quality for $550.

I no longer own the Optika6 - sold it and kept the Meopta ZD instead. The ZD has glass that is as clear as the razor's IMO but not quite as flat at 1x and it doesn't have the same "window effect" that the Razor and Optika6 have (thin scope tube that disappears at the right eye relief), but it is as bright or brighter than the Razor so the RDS performance is there so I had to keep it over the Optika.

Anyway, the Razor is a fantastic optic and with one in my hands it's obvious why it's the class leader. Still, if you can live without daylight bright illumination, the Optika6 is clearly the best value LPVO on the market for under $1k IMO. Anyone in the market for a 1-6 SFP optic should take a really hard look at the Optika6, IMO.

Related - I also got the Holosun MRDS mounted in an Arisaka offset. With the Credo it is a pretty light setup. We'll see how I like the offset RDS setup. Given the generous eyebox and 2x FOV I think this gun would be perfectly usable with out the RDS but it will be fun to test out at least. The Holosun was cheap enough to make it worth a try..

https://i.imgur.com/FgLpT3J.jpeg

https://i.imgur.com/hIoK2dO.jpg

[Nephrology]

What do you mean? I just want an optic that can do both FFP and SFP, with a daylight bright reticule that has user-adjustable options for dot, circle-dot, and horseshoe, that has stadia lines when I want them and none when I don't, that weights <1 lbs with mount and all and costs less than $500?

:p

Ok, in reality, I'd take 2 of those. sub-16 oz mounted and true daylight brightness, and I'd double the price restriction.

I know you're joking... but March does make a 1-10 that is supposedly daylight bright and weighs under 19 oz

https://marchscopes.com/scopes/d10v24t/

edit: oops, actually, the illuminated model is this one, and it's even lighter at 17.8 oz:

https://marchscopes.com/scopes/d10sv24fiml/

[DamonL]

Thats a lot less than the S&B Dual.

[Nephrology]

Thats a lot less than the S&B Dual.

About $750 more than the Razor III 1-10 which I imagine is probably its biggest competition. I wonder how well their reticles scale over the 1-10 range.

edit... looks like they actually answer that question for me right on the product page.... it's no donut of death but looks totally usable at 1, 5 and 10x

[DamonL]

The Razor 1-10 is FFP-only rather than Dual Focal Plane. I don’t think they are a good comparison. What is interesting is there are scopes being developed to try to cover CQB to long range in a single optic without having to compromise.

[Nephrology]

The Razor 1-10 is FFP-only rather than Dual Focal Plane. I don’t think they are a good comparison. What is interesting is there are scopes being developed to try to cover CQB to long range in a single optic without having to compromise.

Fair point. I'm not sure if I am that familiar with those - are you talking about the short dot?

[DamonL]

Yes. The Short Dot Dual I referenced earlier and the second March scope that you referenced. Both put the ranging reticle in the FFP and the red dot in the SFP. Both are really new models.

[Nephrology]

Yes. The Short Dot Dual I referenced earlier and the second March scope that you referenced. Both put the ranging reticle in the FFP and the red dot in the SFP. Both are really new models.

I didn't know thats how their illumination tech worked.... that's really neat.

[Nephrology]

BTW, since this is the LPVO thread.... Optika 6 1-6 SFP on sale at Dvor for $439. Really great deal. Get the SFP with a good reticlel ike the KDOT, definitely pass on all of the FFP models.

https://www.dvor.com/meopta-meopro-optika6-1-6x24mm-rifle-scope.html?promotion=meopta-optics-37-2021-02-28&options[]=2179-8354-112010&options[]=2179-8506-170126&options[]=2179-8347-106405&options[]=2179-8442-404287&options[]=2179-316-393738

[KEW8338]

Sort of a LVPO video (https://mobile.twitter.com/CalibreObscura/status/1363496394917617665)

There is a lot going on there. But, magnification definitely helped support precision.

[DamonL]

I didn't know thats how their illumination tech worked.... that's really neat.

Thanks for sharing the info on the March scope. I did not know about it.

Until these scopes came out, you had to choose between SFP or FFP. With FFP the reticle changes with magnification. With SFP, ranging reticles were only useful at one magnification. These new dual focal plane optics are interesting.

I found some info on the March scope here:

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/new-march-1-10x24-any-feedback.7036748/

This video illustrates how the dual focal plane works.

https://nis.nikonimagespace.com/html/guest/en/detail.html?g=Fmpm1_QgdcPPJXEfzsY_YqGMv_1hdQB9nODz LLHA3AeqQRujlukrWBAlkKzFv_zNwgfWLw8pHvvfBFTfCfCbiA&r=0#i/1

If you watch the cross hairs, they are the same through out the change in magnification. They are SFP. When you see the ranging marks, they grow and shrink because they are in the FFP.

[Wake27]

The only LPVO I’ve used that wasn’t a Vortex is the P4Xi but since Steiner raised the price on them, I haven’t seen anything on paper that would make me want to go with any LPVO besides Vortex.

The Viper Gen II is super cheap to competitors in its class and gives solid performance at its price point. The one downside is the weight.

The Razor 1-6 E is a tad bit lighter, more durable, and has better performance if you want something with excellent 1x performance but solid top end magnification and are willing to pay a little more than double the Viper’s price.

The Razor 1-10 is the best all around LPVO on the market right now with 1x that is just barely outperformed by the 1-6, but a much higher top end and a more usable reticle for distance.

The only place Vortex is lacking is a lightweight 1-4 to supplement the Viper and Razor lines for those who want the same performance but would shed some weight for less magnification. I know that’s not a straight trade off, but would love to see it. The P4Xi used to fill that role but after they raised their prices, it’s real hard to justify the extra money for less magnification to save some weight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[littlejerry]

The Trijicon Credo HX is still a strong contender in the SFP 1-6 category. Their naming/marketing is a nightmare but they offer:


- Red or green fiber illuminated center dot(like P4xi or Razor)
- Made in Japan
- .223 or .308 BDC
- <20oz
- <$800 street price

[Nephrology]

The only place Vortex is lacking is a lightweight 1-4 to supplement the Viper and Razor lines for those who want the same performance but would shed some weight for less magnification. I know that’s not a straight trade off, but would love to see it. The P4Xi used to fill that role but after they raised their prices, it’s real hard to justify the extra money for less magnification to save some weight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've been using a Meopta ZD 1-4 for this purpose, but it's a somewhat dated scope design. It's daylight bright and has good glass, but it's a tad heavy at 19oz. If there was an optic with similar quality build/glass/illumination but at 14oz, I'd happy pay $1k for it and sell the ZD in a heart beat.

[pastaslinger]

I'm interested in the Athlon 1-10x Ares coming out - on paper it looks like a heavy Razor Gen III

If I find a good price on a Gen II-E Razor I might grab one though

[theJanitor]

The P4Xi used to fill that role but after they raised their prices, it’s real hard to justify the extra money for less magnification to save some weight.


and their warranty repairs have been super slow, both on the optic, and laser side.



If I find a good price on a Gen II-E Razor I might grab one though

AAoptics had a refurb gen2e this morning for $925. it sold pretty quick

[pastaslinger]

and their warranty repairs have been super slow, both on the optic, and laser side.



AAoptics had a refurb gen2e this morning for $925. it sold pretty quick

Wow I had just checked this AM too... Maybe I was too early or too late...

[Nephrology]

AAoptics had a refurb gen2e this morning for $925. it sold pretty quick

Damn. That's a steal.

[Nephrology]

My two Recces with LPVOs as they stand now.

https://i.imgur.com/zWYXXRg.jpg

[John Hearne]

https://dsgarms.com/magnified-optics-kt-stn5202-war-v4002m

Steiner on-sale this weekend with mount....

[bman940]

I recently started using the Meopta MeoStar R2 1-6x24 KDot RD scope and love it. First off the fit and finish is done to perfection. The RD is daylight bright and at a shade over a pound doesn't hinder both the balance of my SBR. I know they are tough to find but definitely worth the $. Dialing in bullet drops is a snap using the Strelok Pro App. This should be a fun combo for competition and swine hunting.

https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/dd363/bman940/IMG_9208.jpeg

[mrozowjj]

The Trijicon Credo HX is still a strong contender in the SFP 1-6 category. Their naming/marketing is a nightmare but they offer:


- Red or green fiber illuminated center dot(like P4xi or Razor)
- Made in Japan
- .223 or .308 BDC
- <20oz
- <$800 street price


Fiber illuminated center dot? I thought it was LED. Does it have a fiber light collector like the ACOG? Maybe I don't udnerstand the technology

[mrozowjj]

That's spot on. The market for LPVOs has evolved into precision optics that you can turn down, instead of red dots that you can turn up. The top end on power continues to increase, the reticles keep getting more complicated, etc. etc. There's a marketing vs. demand self licking ice cream cone with features and its arms race on making the high-end power setup ever more.

All things being equal, having more raw power on the top end isn't a bad thing. But all things are rarely equal (and that equality drives the price into orbit).

I still like my Trijicon TR24 1-4x with the red triangle. It's a really good red dot with built-in magnifier. It's slick at 1x. It's handy at 4x. I can put a hurting on anything 0-300 in a hurry and much faster than just a dot alone once distance starts to outrun my eyesight.

For a more precision setup with longer distances, I have a 3-15x on a gun setup for that.

I agree with this assessment. I have a 1-8 on my gun but inside of 300 yards I don't really need the 8x. It has all of these markings to help me get hits out to 900 but I don't know if I'll ever use them. If I had to ID a target I might like the extra magnification but all I ever shoot is paper and steel so I'm finding for my other guns a 1-6 is more than adequate. Honestly a 1-4 is fine but the 1-6s don't weigh or cost that much more so why not.

With 1 added addendum, if you have astigmatism the red dot + magnification might not be as ideal to you at longer distances as the LPVO. I'm lucky because I have a mild one but with a 3X the dot looks a crisp again so I can use it at longer rangers no problems but not everyone is this lucky. There's also the fact that some of the 1-4x weigh can weigh less than a red dot + magnifier.

[rob_s]

That's spot on. The market for LPVOs has evolved into precision optics that you can turn down, instead of red dots that you can turn up. The top end on power continues to increase, the reticles keep getting more complicated, etc. etc. There's a marketing vs. demand self licking ice cream cone with features and its arms race on making the high-end power setup ever more.

All things being equal, having more raw power on the top end isn't a bad thing. But all things are rarely equal (and that equality drives the price into orbit).

I still like my Trijicon TR24 1-4x with the red triangle. It's a really good red dot with built-in magnifier. It's slick at 1x. It's handy at 4x. I can put a hurting on anything 0-300 in a hurry and much faster than just a dot alone once distance starts to outrun my eyesight.

For a more precision setup with longer distances, I have a 3-15x on a gun setup for that.


I agree with this assessment. I have a 1-8 on my gun but inside of 300 yards I don't really need the 8x. It has all of these markings to help me get hits out to 900 but I don't know if I'll ever use them. If I had to ID a target I might like the extra magnification but all I ever shoot is paper and steel so I'm finding for my other guns a 1-6 is more than adequate. Honestly a 1-4 is fine but the 1-6s don't weigh or cost that much more so why not.

With 1 added addendum, if you have astigmatism the red dot + magnification might not be as ideal to you at longer distances as the LPVO. I'm lucky because I have a mild one but with a 3X the dot looks a crisp again so I can use it at longer rangers no problems but not everyone is this lucky. There's also the fact that some of the 1-4x weigh can weigh less than a red dot + magnifier.

I kind of brushed past Lok’s post the first time but now that mrozow has quoted it, it really rings true to me.

Just like Godwin’s law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law?wprov=sfti1)says that all internet arguments eventually end with “Nazi”, it seems that all rifle shit eventually ends with “sniper”.

As I’ve said elsewhere, I just keep hoping (perhaps futilely, as I’ve come to realize that the AR world has moved on without me, however comically) someone takes all that technology that they are using to give the commercial market their MOAR and comes out with a truly compact, ultralight, 1-or-4x (vs 1-4) or 1-or-5x optic that’s astigmatism friendly, daylight bright, and doesn’t break the bank.

The parts and pieces are there, it would seem. When Aimpoint first showed the Micros at SHOT in Orlando eons ago they seemed primed to be able to offer a magnified version with some level of variable magnification in a package not much larger than the 30mm Aimpoint. Now with all the various MRDS it would seem that the tech has shrunk more than enough to do so, but the market just isn’t there as everyone pursues MOAR sniper.

And, having replaced the battery in my HD Aimpoint (an M2, I believe) recently and seeing a little more bloom than I recall previously, perhaps an Aimpoint emitter isn’t what I want in my fantasy optic anyway. While I was in the safe I took out my other AR with the TA33 wherein the tritium must be long-since dead and noted that I could still make out the reticule, and even more so once the (presumably also outdated) Surefire x300 was activated.

Most consumer and hobbiest products seem to go through a MOAR/smaller/cheaper/MOAR/smaller/cheaper development cycle so maybe we’ll one day put down the “sniper” rifles and the market will trend towards less magnification in favor of a more compact profile and lower cost.

I can dream.

[gato naranja]

Just like Godwin’s law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law?wprov=sfti1)says that all internet arguments eventually end with “Nazi”, it seems that all rifle shit eventually ends with “sniper”.

As I’ve said elsewhere, I just keep hoping (perhaps futilely, as I’ve come to realize that the AR world has moved on without me, however comically) someone takes all that technology that they are using to give the commercial market their MOAR and comes out with a truly compact, ultralight, 1-or-4x (vs 1-4) or 1-or-5x optic that’s astigmatism friendly, daylight bright, and doesn’t break the bank.

The parts and pieces are there, it would seem. When Aimpoint first showed the Micros at SHOT in Orlando eons ago they seemed primed to be able to offer a magnified version with some level of variable magnification in a package not much larger than the 30mm Aimpoint. Now with all the various MRDS it would seem that the tech has shrunk more than enough to do so, but the market just isn’t there as everyone pursues MOAR sniper.

Most consumer and hobbiest products seem to go through a MOAR/smaller/cheaper/MOAR/smaller/cheaper development cycle so maybe we’ll one day put down the “sniper” rifles and the market will trend towards less magnification in favor of a more compact profile and lower cost.

I gotta savor that a while.

Once I hit middle age, putting any riflescope much over 9 or 10 power on one of my rifles was essentially just putting a sub-par spotting scope with a reticle on my rifle. "A good cat knows his limitations."

[GAP]

I’ve read this thread but still have questions on a relatively lightweight 1-4x or 1-6x that falls under $700.

What are presently the best options out there? Thanks.

[PearTree]

I’ve read this thread but still have questions on a relatively lightweight 1-4x or 1-6x that falls under $700.

What are presently the best options out there? Thanks.

My preference is a Steiner px4-i. It’s 650 at cameralandny right now. Daylight bright dot, small difference from my h2 on 1x, and a nice reticle on 4x.

[rob_s]

My preference is a Steiner px4-i. It’s 650 at cameralandny right now. Daylight bright dot, small difference from my h2 on 1x, and a nice reticle on 4x.

not bad at just a hair over 17oz. What I still don't get is why someone can't make a 10oz 1-4 if these guys are making 18oz 1-10s (https://marchscopes.com/scopes/d10sv24fiml/)...

there seem to be a few options. I'm presuming these are all just bundles?
https://cameralandny.com/shop?query=steiner%20P4xi

and this is the optic alone at $800?
https://cameralandny.com/shop/steiner-p4xi-1-4x24-p3tr-illuminated-law-enforcement/a5505f90-eb13-0134-dfd8-00163e9110c0?variation=1467309&query=steiner%20P4xi

with this price in cart
69547

[GAP]

My preference is a Steiner px4-i. It’s 650 at cameralandny right now. Daylight bright dot, small difference from my h2 on 1x, and a nice reticle on 4x.

That is the one I’ve been eyeballing.. thanks for the head’s up.

I see they have a bundle with their p-series mount for an extra $100...

[mrozowjj]

not bad at just a hair over 17oz. What I still don't get is why someone can't make a 10oz 1-4 if these guys are making 18oz 1-10s (https://marchscopes.com/scopes/d10sv24fiml/)...

there seem to be a few options. I'm presuming these are all just bundles?
https://cameralandny.com/shop?query=steiner%20P4xi

and this is the optic alone at $800?
https://cameralandny.com/shop/steiner-p4xi-1-4x24-p3tr-illuminated-law-enforcement/a5505f90-eb13-0134-dfd8-00163e9110c0?variation=1467309&query=steiner%20P4xi

with this price in cart
69547

That is crazy. Black Friday 2019 those were going for $400 with a mount. Pandemic pricing I guess?

The lightest 1-4 and 1-5x scopes out here are Leupold but they aren't "high speed low drag" and the reticle options kind of suck. Things like this:

https://www.leupold.com/vx-3hd-1-5-5x20-cds-zl-duplex

I also have the similar concern you have. Part of the reason I still have the NX8 1-8 on my AR is that it's 17 oz for a 1-8. I don't need the 8x but when 1-6x weigh 19oz I don't see the point in them unless cost is a concern... which is is which is why I'm looking for an alternative for my other guns. If the NX8 was cheaper I would run it on everything.

[OlongJohnson]

https://www.leupold.com/vx-3hd-1-5-5x20-cds-zl-duplex

I'd be perfectly happy with 4x instead of 5x on the top end at that size and weight if it came with a true 1x on the bottom.

[mrozowjj]

I'd be perfectly happy with 4x instead of 5x on the top end at that size and weight if it came with a true 1x on the bottom.

They have some 1-5xs but they cost and weigh more:
https://www.leupold.com/vx-5hd-1-5x24-metric-illum-firedot-4-fine-riflescope

It's 15oz instead of 10oz and an MSRP of $1000 instead of $500

No idea if either of them are any good.

[pastaslinger]

I’ve read this thread but still have questions on a relatively lightweight 1-4x or 1-6x that falls under $700.

What are presently the best options out there? Thanks.

If you can still find one, I very much like my Burris XTR II 1-5x scopes. Best $425 I have spent on gun accessories.

I think now, your options are pretty limited. The Steiner P4xi is a little overpriced but may come in below $700. The Vortex PST II 1-6x is pretty good and would likely be my choice.

I'm not impressed with the budget Primary Arms options other than the reticles. The Vortex Strike Eagles are likewise non-impressive.

[rob_s]

The lightest 1-4 and 1-5x scopes out here are Leupold but they aren't "high speed low drag" and the reticle options kind of suck. Things like this:

https://www.leupold.com/vx-3hd-1-5-5x20-cds-zl-duplex


They have some 1-5xs but they cost and weigh more:
https://www.leupold.com/vx-5hd-1-5x24-metric-illum-firedot-4-fine-riflescope

It's 15oz instead of 10oz and an MSRP of $1000 instead of $500

No idea if either of them are any good.

I think the weight difference comes as much from the 1.5-5 linked being non-illuminated, and the 1-5 linked being illuminated, as anything else.

I had a Leupold... patrol or something? I think it was 1.5-4? I didn’t mind the 1.5 too much but I’d have preferred a “true” illumination was also... lacking.

[GAP]

Right now it seems the top two options are the Steiner at $650 or Vortex Viper PST Gen II 1-6×24 at $600.

Is the Viper at the same level as the Steiner, is it much bigger, any other experiences?

[Nephrology]

Right now it seems the top two options are the Steiner at $650 or Vortex Viper PST Gen II 1-6×24 at $600.

Is the Viper at the same level as the Steiner, is it much bigger, any other experiences?

I'd also look at the Meopta Optika6 1-6 SFP with the KDOT reticle for $550. I can't speak to the steiner, but they are better in every way (reticle, build quality, glass clarity, etc) EXCEPT illumination. The Optika does not have daylight bright illumination like the PST does, which can be a deal breaker for some people/applications, but I personally chose to keep the Optika over the Vortex. I only got rid of the Optika when I decided to upgrade to a Razor IIE

[PearTree]

not bad at just a hair over 17oz. What I still don't get is why someone can't make a 10oz 1-4 if these guys are making 18oz 1-10s (https://marchscopes.com/scopes/d10sv24fiml/)...

there seem to be a few options. I'm presuming these are all just bundles?
https://cameralandny.com/shop?query=steiner%20P4xi

and this is the optic alone at $800?
https://cameralandny.com/shop/steiner-p4xi-1-4x24-p3tr-illuminated-law-enforcement/a5505f90-eb13-0134-dfd8-00163e9110c0?variation=1467309&query=steiner%20P4xi

with this price in cart
69547

I agree, it seems scope manufacturer's remain focused on durability rather than weight. I also would love a 10oz 1-4 but no one seems to make them.


That is the one I’ve been eyeballing.. thanks for the head’s up.

I see they have a bundle with their p-series mount for an extra $100...

It's a great scope, and much lighter than anything on the market in its price range unless you plan on paying double/triple for a Nightforce or Kahles.


That is crazy. Black Friday 2019 those were going for $400 with a mount. Pandemic pricing I guess?

Steiner increased prices across the board in I believe the end of 2020, that is why the price increased.

[Nephrology]

Right now it seems the top two options are the Steiner at $650 or Vortex Viper PST Gen II 1-6×24 at $600.

Is the Viper at the same level as the Steiner, is it much bigger, any other experiences?

One more thing - there are deals on these optics to be had. You can get a Viper PST II 1-6 here (https://www.eurooptic.com/Vortex-Viper-PST-Gen-II-1-6x24-VMR-2-MRAD-Like-New-Demo-Scope-PST-1607.aspx) for $500 LNIB. It also looks like DVOR has a sale (https://www.dvor.com/trijicon-credo-1-6x24mm-riflescope.html) on the Credo 1-6 too. I have a Credo 2-10 and I'm 99% certain these scopes are LOW made, but I don't have any experience with the model directly.

Sportoptics has a seemingly standing deal on all European scopes (incl Meopta) - EURO16 will get you 16% any qualifying item. Seems like their selection of Optika6 1-6s is not great right now though. Samplelist also has good deals from time to time but the savings are generally modest

[gato naranja]

The Vortex PST II 1-6x is pretty good and would likely be my choice.

I like the one I have, and still consider it the best option at that price point.

[GAP]

One more thing - there are deals on these optics to be had. You can get a Viper PST II 1-6 here (https://www.eurooptic.com/Vortex-Viper-PST-Gen-II-1-6x24-VMR-2-MRAD-Like-New-Demo-Scope-PST-1607.aspx) for $500 LNIB. It also looks like DVOR has a sale (https://www.dvor.com/trijicon-credo-1-6x24mm-riflescope.html) on the Credo 1-6 too. I have a Credo 2-10 and I'm 99% certain these scopes are LOW made, but I don't have any experience with the model directly.

Sportoptics has a seemingly standing deal on all European scopes (incl Meopta) - EURO16 will get you 16% any qualifying item. Seems like their selection of Optika6 1-6s is not great right now though. Samplelist also has good deals from time to time but the savings are generally modest

Thanks! The Credo 1-4 looks interesting, too... I am not super concerned with day time brightness. A reticle that I can see in 1x, during the day, with or without illumination is my preference.

[Nephrology]

Thanks! The Credo 1-4 looks interesting, too... I am not super concerned with day time brightness. A reticle that I can see in 1x, during the day, with or without illumination is my preference.

Definitely look into the Optika6, then. Make sure to get the SFP model and hold out for one with the KDOT RD reticle. It's a really intuitive and simple BDC that is built for 5.56 NATO zeroed at 100M with drops for 300, 400, 500M. The only small issue with thhis reticle is that it's a 2MOA center dot so it's not as precise, but definitely very fast. There's a .223 BDC reticle too that is more similar to the JM-1 BDC in the Vortex Razor (based on a simple crosshair) if you want something a little more fine.

[rob_s]

Vortex Viper PST Gen II 1-6×24 at $600.

this is just fucking nutty in 2021 IMO
Weight 22.7 oz

which brings me back to use case, I suppose, (and probably someone with a "go to the gym" kind of response) but IMO adding an extra 5-12 oz isn't great.

[Default.mp3]

not bad at just a hair over 17oz. What I still don't get is why someone can't make a 10oz 1-4 if these guys are making 18oz 1-10s (https://marchscopes.com/scopes/d10sv24fiml/)...

Well, I've been told that magnification and weight aren't really correlated.

If you're looking to shave weight, decreasing the magnification is about the last way to go about doing it. Mostly on account of the fact that it would literally do nothing to the weight at all. In fact - there's really no gain to be had by going to a lower magnification in an LPVO aside from maybe the fact that your subtensions in a 1-4x SFP optic would be correct in relation to target size at 4x rather than 6x. Weight, length, shape, size, optical quality, etc would really not be affected at all if we're talking about making a scope with the same level of optical quality, build quality and features.


Edit - we'll keep going since it's almost closing time and this is a fun topic. Optical performance on 1x wouldn't magically get better by lopping off 2x on the high end either. At least... Not in a way that's worth it. The Razor 1-6 already has some crazy good 1x performance and has widely been regarded as one of the best. One could make it even better, but there would be no reason to lose magnification in order to do it - you could get better 1x performance with a 1-6x or a 1-8x or if you really go nuts and start designing some optical systems with lens elements and curvatures that would make a lens-grinder's mind melt, a 1-10x. You could also get lighter too if you start using some more expensive materials and manufacturing methods. Sure, the Razor isn't the lightest LPVO out there, but it's a damn good one and comes in at a great price as-is for what it does performance-wise.


Bottom line - a 1-4x Razor with all else being the same level of quality and same features would still be expensive and still be just as heavy and still look just as nice. Don't hamstring yourself :)


We get it, though - people want lighter and that's something we've been listening to for a long time. The other thing people need to consider is that optics take a long ass time to develop. 3-5 years isn't out of the ordinary at all, especially when it's at such a high end. Rest assured - there are professionals here who went to school for this stuff that are working full time to make our optics better in every way and in ways that customers request (Unless they start trying to request Band-aid solutions that won't work and will just create more issues!) ;) lol Keep your eyes peeled!


Thanks as always to everyone who keeps us working on new stuff all the time. Keeps this job interesting.Source: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?214195-Am-I-the-only-one-who-wishes-there-was-a-Razor-HD-Gen-II-1-4x24&p=2719784#post2719784

[rob_s]

Well, I've been told that magnification and weight aren't really correlated.
Source: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?214195-Am-I-the-only-one-who-wishes-there-was-a-Razor-HD-Gen-II-1-4x24&p=2719784#post2719784

yeah, I know.

But the heart wants what the heart wants. :p

[Nephrology]

yeah, I know.

But the heart wants what the heart wants. :p

March makes a 17oz 1-10, if you have the money for it...

[TWR]

I have 2 Trijicon Accupower 1-4 with the red segmented circle and they are just about the perfect AR scope for me. I’m now looking at an SWFA 1-6 HD again to try a daylight bright FFP optic just to see but 22.6 oz is holding me back more than the price. It’s just insane to use pencil barrels and build the gun as light as you can then stick a pig of a scope on it.

But I do have a Kimber Montana with a 19 oz SWFA 3-9 so sometimes the weight penalty is doable if it brings something extra to the table.

[HCM]

I have 2 Trijicon Accupower 1-4 with the red segmented circle and they are just about the perfect AR scope for me. I’m now looking at an SWFA 1-6 HD again to try a daylight bright FFP optic just to see but 22.6 oz is holding me back more than the price. It’s just insane to use pencil barrels and build the gun as light as you can then stick a pig of a scope on it.

But I do have a Kimber Montana with a 19 oz SWFA 3-9 so sometimes the weight penalty is doable if it brings something extra to the table.

The issue was not necessarily the week itself but rather the way a heavy optic on a light gun changes the balance and handling.

[TWR]

Yes and no. I’m not a 98 lb weakling and I’ve ran a marathon at 235 lbs but I walk a lot when hunting and try to keep everything as light as I can. That means I can add weight somewhere else for something that is needed. The Montana for instance. It weighs just over 5 lbs, adding the ammo and the 19 oz 3-9 brings that weight up to just over 7 lbs. but what it gives me in return is the ability to shoot out to 800 yards with precision by dialing elevation and holding wind. I’ve shot this light rig out to 1000 yards but without parallax adjustment, it’s not as consistent past 800.

Balance is still in the same, even when I had one on an AR, balance was good but handling sucked due to the 3x low end. The 223 just doesn’t do much past 600 yards and I can handle that with the lighter 1-4’s. What I’m wondering is will the brighter dot and FFP benefit me enough to suffer the weight.

After typing this out and reading it, I guess I’m saying the same thing as everyone else “why do they have to weigh so much?”

[Clusterfrack]

They don’t have to. My Mk.6 1-6 FFP is 17 Oz. Unfortunately very expensive and now discontinued.

[Jimichanga]

I have 2 Trijicon Accupower 1-4 with the red segmented circle and they are just about the perfect AR scope for me. I’m now looking at an SWFA 1-6 HD again to try a daylight bright FFP optic just to see but 22.6 oz is holding me back more than the price. It’s just insane to use pencil barrels and build the gun as light as you can then stick a pig of a scope on it.

But I do have a Kimber Montana with a 19 oz SWFA 3-9 so sometimes the weight penalty is doable if it brings something extra to the table.

The SWFA 1-6 is showing its age. The reticle is less than stellar and the magnification adjustment is stiff (unless they addressed that issue). For 120 more I would get the Vortex Gen IIe and not look back. I don't mind the weight of the Razor line, they are durable.

[mrozowjj]

Well, I've been told that magnification and weight aren't really correlated.
Source: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?214195-Am-I-the-only-one-who-wishes-there-was-a-Razor-HD-Gen-II-1-4x24&p=2719784#post2719784

That makes sense when you start to think about it. A 1-4x, 1-6x, 1-8x, 1-10x all probably have similar amounts of glass and aluminum in them assuming they are all 30mm tubes. The reason a 1-6 or a 1-4 is cheaper than a 1-8 or a 1-10 is it's probably easier to get higher levels of light transmission with glass that gives you a lower magnification range. It's why the Razor 1-10x is $2000, and the 1-6 Razor was like $1200 and the Steiner 1-4x is $650.

That said I am intrigued by the Trijicon Credo HX 1-6x.

[Clusterfrack]

The EOTech Vudu 1-6 FFP is my favorite scope for the money right now. 20oz. Daylight bright. Good at 1x, and usable reticle.

[breakingtime91]

The EOTech Vudu 1-6 FFP is my favorite scope for the money right now. 20oz. Daylight bright. Good at 1x, and usable reticle.

are you using the mrad reticle?

[Clusterfrack]

are you using the mrad reticle?

I don’t have one. My buddy has two, with mrad.

[breakingtime91]

I don’t have one. My buddy has two, with mrad.

interesting.. I have a 3x magnifier and h2 on my 16inch rifle and have been eyeing lpvos in the 1-6 range to replace it.

[GyroF-16]

interesting.. I have a 3x magnifier and h2 on my 16inch rifle and have been eyeing lpvos in the 1-6 range to replace it.

Funny you should mention that just now. I just got a x3 magnifier for my 16” AR after being dissatisfied with the available precision at 100 yds with a 2 moa dot. The intermediate step was using a Holosun “RDS” with a chevron and holdover references. While I appreciated the increased refinement of the chevron, I found it to be very small. So now I have a (yet unmounted) x3 magnifier.
I have a feeling that I may be about a year behind you in the process...
May I ask what is prompting you to look at LVPO now?

[breakingtime91]

Funny you should mention that just now. I just got a x3 magnifier for my 16” AR after being dissatisfied with the available precision at 100 yds with a 2 moa dot. The intermediate step was using a Holosun “RDS” with a chevron and holdover references. While I appreciated the increased refinement of the chevron, I found it to be very small. So now I have a (yet unmounted) x3 magnifier.
I have a feeling that I may be about a year behind you in the process...
May I ask what is prompting you to look at LVPO now?


So a magnifier is great, until it isn't. It is only 3x magnification and while it helps it doesn't give me hold overs with the h2 or anything past 100 yards to provide a really good PID. If I can get hold overs, good magnification for PID, and its durable I want it. Red dots are great and they are great tools, but so are LPVOS and I really want this gun to have the ability to allow me to assess what is a threat and what isn't given the current climate in the united states.

[theJanitor]

Red dots are great and they are great tools, but so are LPVOS....

And I just went the other direction, and am keeping the G33/FAST magnifier, and divesting myself of my modest LPVO setup.

[mrozowjj]

Funny you should mention that just now. I just got a x3 magnifier for my 16” AR after being dissatisfied with the available precision at 100 yds with a 2 moa dot. The intermediate step was using a Holosun “RDS” with a chevron and holdover references. While I appreciated the increased refinement of the chevron, I found it to be very small. So now I have a (yet unmounted) x3 magnifier.
I have a feeling that I may be about a year behind you in the process...
May I ask what is prompting you to look at LVPO now?

The Primary Arms ACSS model of holosun? Yeah their website is incredibly misleading. They show you this rather large chevron but when you get it what you see is a small oval insted of a chevron. If you get the brightness setting just right for the light conditions you are shooting in you might get the chevron but in almost every real world use case you get a oval. To say I ws disappointed in that would be an understatment. Propbly returned it.

[rob_s]

With the direction the “traditional” LPVO market is going, and the seeming unwillingness of Aimpoint to make what I want, I find myself wishing these guys could just fix their weight problem
https://www.opticsplanet.com/elcan-specter-dual-role-1x-4x-optical-sight-cx5396-illuminated-crosshair-reticle.html

[19852+]

With the direction the “traditional” LPVO market is going, and the seeming unwillingness of Aimpoint to make what I want, I find myself wishing these guys could just fix their weight problem
https://www.opticsplanet.com/elcan-specter-dual-role-1x-4x-optical-sight-cx5396-illuminated-crosshair-reticle.html

I could love me a nice Elcan ! But the cost... I did find a like new-w/o box Aimpoint Comp M4 to go with the Aimpoint 3x mag that I bought years ago. It was a demo model going cheap so I got it thinking if I didn't mount it on a rifle it could be a nice compact monocle. It has the twist off mount so off it goes when not needed. Aimpoint has a twist off/flip to side mount that I will get for versatility sometime soon. Yes, all set up it's as long as a LPVO and at least as heavy but with the mag removed the foot print is smaller. Plus, the CompM4 is about as bomb proof as it gets and then there is the battery life.
If I want to save some weight I'll get a lighter barrel.

[KEW8338]

Elcans are pretty gross.

Arms throw levers with non adjustable tension that are prone to wearing out.

Magnification throw lever prone to breaking

[Clusterfrack]

I love my Elcan 1-4. I’ve beat it up pretty hard. The glass and brightness are stunning. If I had to choose one carbine optic, this would probably be it.

[KEW8338]

I love my Elcan 1-4. I’ve beat it up pretty hard. The glass and brightness are stunning. If I had to choose one carbine optic, this would probably be it.

I have used Elcans on a variety of rifles and machine guns. I have seen them fielded on a large scale. I have seen them fail on a large scale.

[Clusterfrack]

I have used Elcans on a variety of rifles and machine guns. I have seen them fielded on a large scale. I have seen them fail on a large scale.

Check.

[GyroF-16]

The Primary Arms ACSS model of holosun? Yeah their website is incredibly misleading. They show you this rather large chevron but when you get it what you see is a small oval insted of a chevron. If you get the brightness setting just right for the light conditions you are shooting in you might get the chevron but in almost every real world use case you get a oval. To say I ws disappointed in that would be an understatment. Propbly returned it.

Yes - specifically the “Holosun Paralow HS503G Red Dot Sight - ACSS CQB Reticle”. Looking at the images on the website after using mine, the representation of the reticle superimposed on the FOV (as if looking through the tube) are pretty accurate. I just didn’t imagine that it was really that small.
Wearing glasses to correct my slight astigmatism, and with the sight set dim enough to not bloom, the reticle is pretty clear. I just found that shooting an 8” bull at 100 yds, I was trying to “put a really small thing on a really small thing.”
I’m hoping that a x3 magnifier, it will be easier to use. And hoping that, with the option to flip the magnifier to the side, or remove it via QD mount), I’ll retain lots of flexibility without making the rifle too much heavier full time.

[19852+]

I have used Elcans on a variety of rifles and machine guns. I have seen them fielded on a large scale. I have seen them fail on a large scale.

Interesting. I like my Aimpoint + magnifier set up and it is very much like an Elcan, 1X or 3X, take your pick. One good point would be that if one fails it does not render the other useless. I don't know how rugged the Aimpoint mag is but the Comp M4 is considered very rugged. I also have back up irons just in case.

[Default.mp3]

Interesting. I like my Aimpoint + magnifier set up and it is very much like an Elcan, 1X or 3X, take your pick. One good point would be that if one fails it does not render the other useless. I don't know how rugged the Aimpoint mag is but the Comp M4 is considered very rugged. I also have back up irons just in case.I don't think an Aimpoint with a magnifier is comparable to a SpecterDR. The big issue is light transmission and FOV.

The SpecterDR is going to have far superior light transmission compared to the Aimpoint combined with a magnifier; I don't know the light transmission of the SpecterDR, but even Elcan's most vocal detractors will grudgingly admit that they have excellent optics (many high quality LPVOs are >90%, so I would wager most Elcans are, too). Most duty oriented Aimpoints have 70% light transmission (the H-series only have 60%), while the duty oriented Aimpoint magnifiers have 75% light transmission (don't know what the EOTechs are, but I would imagine similar); in series this would mean 52.5% light transmission, which means that the SpecterDR will destroy an Aimpoint RDS/magnifier combo under low-light conditions.

Then there's FOV; the SpecterDR at 4× has a larger FOV (6.5°) than the Aimpoint 3X-C (6°), while only slightly beaten by the 3XMag-1 (7°) or the EOTech G33 (7.3°), G30 (7.3°), or G43(7.5°) while still providing better magnification. Not great for the magnifiers.

That being said, as noted, the SpecterDR has a lot of perceived flaws (some of which have allegedly been fixed, such as the zero shift that occurs when switching magnifications), so while they definitely have some hardcore supporters within institutions (including folks that have used them extensively operationally), there's a lot more detractors with very valid concerns. I personally also stick with an RDS/magnifier combo on my 11.5"; my LPVOs are on my 14.5" AR-15 and 16" SR-25, which are oriented for further distances. I definitely feel that RDS/magnifiers fulfill a different role than the LPVO; the RDS/magnifier is when I am primarily focused on close-range shooting, with some ability to get some magnification, while the LPVO is more of a jack-of-all-trades, with equal emphasis on close range versus magnification.

[Clusterfrack]

I don't think an Aimpoint with a magnifier is comparable to a SpecterDR. The big issue is light transmission and FOV.

The SpecterDR is going to have far superior light transmission compared to the Aimpoint combined with a magnifier; I don't know the light transmission of the SpecterDR, but even Elcan's most vocal detractors will grudgingly admit that they have excellent optics

My SpecterDR is optically outstanding. I once calculated the effect f-number for it, and if I recall it was better than f1.0. I can see better in low light through the optic on 1x than with my naked eye.

[KEW8338]

Optically I have no qualms with the Elcans.

Reticles are mehh. But I understand the thought process behind specific ones which I cant argue with.

The mounts are garbage. ARMS inc is notorious for promoting missed opportunities.

The throw lever is lacking durability and stability.

For those using Aimpoint magnifiers. Be mindful of parallax issues. If you notice zero shifts between magnified and non magnified, just make sure its repeatable.

[sickeness]

So a magnifier is great, until it isn't. It is only 3x magnification and while it helps it doesn't give me hold overs with the h2 or anything past 100 yards to provide a really good PID. If I can get hold overs, good magnification for PID, and its durable I want it. Red dots are great and they are great tools, but so are LPVOS and I really want this gun to have the ability to allow me to assess what is a threat and what isn't given the current climate in the united states.

Not to mention the fact that all red dots will have zero shift to varying degrees once you flip on or attach the magnifier.
This is something that is not often discussed whenever this topic comes up but it is a real concern. Which leads me to question whether or not people actually confirm their zero magnified and unmagnified. :rolleyes:

[HCM]

Not to mention the fact that all red dots will have zero shift to varying degrees once you flip on or attach the magnifier.
This is something that is not often discussed whenever this topic comes up but it is a real concern. Which leads me to question whether or not people actually confirm their zero magnified and unmagnified. :rolleyes:

The assumption is the magnifier will be used at greater distance so normal practice is to zero with the magnifier and just note the shift without it since it’s less of an issue at closer ranges. Like suppressors, the key is to ensure the shift is consistent.

[mrozowjj]

Not to mention the fact that all red dots will have zero shift to varying degrees once you flip on or attach the magnifier.
This is something that is not often discussed whenever this topic comes up but it is a real concern. Which leads me to question whether or not people actually confirm their zero magnified and unmagnified. :rolleyes:

I actually did not know this. I've only used one magnifier and the zero didn't seem to shift all that much but I only confirmed at 100 yards.

[sickeness]

I actually did not know this. I've only used one magnifier and the zero didn't seem to shift all that much but I only confirmed at 100 yards.

Here is a link of Chuck Pressburg discussing this issue:

https://youtu.be/dyx0SiDfR6U

[Default.mp3]

Here is a link of Chuck Pressburg discussing this issue:

https://youtu.be/dyx0SiDfR6UYou mean this, probably: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F70QAoDW9dU&ab_channel=PresscheckConsulting

As @HCM (https://pistol-forum.com/member.php?u=1431) noted, it's not a huge deal for most folks, since the focus on precision is once you use the magnifier, while anything closer in and unmagnified isn't going to see enough shift to become an issue.

[rob_s]

Not to mention the fact that all red dots will have zero shift to varying degrees once you flip on or attach the magnifier.
This is something that is not often discussed whenever this topic comes up but it is a real concern. Which leads me to question whether or not people actually confirm their zero magnified and unmagnified. :rolleyes:


The assumption is the magnifier will be used at greater distance so normal practice is to zero with the magnifier and just note the shift without it since it’s less of an issue at closer ranges. Like suppressors, the key is to ensure the shift is consistent.


I actually did not know this. I've only used one magnifier and the zero didn't seem to shift all that much but I only confirmed at 100 yards.


You mean this, probably: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F70QAoDW9dU&ab_channel=PresscheckConsulting

As @HCM (https://pistol-forum.com/member.php?u=1431) noted, it's not a huge deal for most folks, since the focus on precision is once you use the magnifier, while anything closer in and unmagnified isn't going to see enough shift to become an issue.

This would be as good an argument as any to attend a quality carbine course like Randy Cain where you spend a fair amount of time “zeroing” and then confirming that zero (while he sneakily also teaches you concepts like natural point of aim, various positions, natural respiratory pause, etc. so that when you get done “zeroing” you’ve also learned a bunch of other shit without realizing it along the way) from “point blank” out to 200 or more. It would give opportunity to, say, check your initial intersection at 50 unmagnified, expect to be high at 100, add the magnifier at 200 to actually zero, use the magnifier again at 100 on the way back in and see where you’re at, then remove it for a check/confirm the initial intersection at 50 and then move in without the magnifier.

If I cared enough and still had unfettered access to a proper facility I’d love to test all that. I prefer a 100 yard zero (particularly with irons and RDS) but also like to check out to 200 (at which distance I’ll make windage adjustments, maybe, but not elevation) and then walk it back in.

[mrozowjj]

You mean this, probably: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F70QAoDW9dU&ab_channel=PresscheckConsulting

As @HCM (https://pistol-forum.com/member.php?u=1431) noted, it's not a huge deal for most folks, since the focus on precision is once you use the magnifier, while anything closer in and unmagnified isn't going to see enough shift to become an issue.

That's an interesting video. I don't know why I hadn't considered removing the magnifier... that kind of opens options up because I could just have the one magnifier I move across the guns pretty easily. Especially that new 5x from Eotech.

[mmc45414]

That's an interesting video. I don't know why I hadn't considered removing the magnifier... that kind of opens options up because I could just have the one magnifier I move across the guns pretty easily. Especially that new 5x from Eotech.
I have been thinking this would be helpful getting the zero established also.

[Tokarev]

One of the current carbine set-ups for work.

11.5" BCM upper with 9" forend on a USGI surplus M16 lower. Steiner scope, ADM mount and Streamlight light. Arisaka light mount and Streamlight to Surefire tail cap adapter. Cloud Defense switch mount. Troy folding sights. VTAC sling.

The scope and mount weigh 1.6 pounds.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210417/a5d377161d06b4aa556da394ac9fe00e.jpg

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[HCM]

One of the current carbine set-ups for work.

11.5" BCM upper with 9" forend on a USGI surplus M16 lower. Steiner scope, ADM mount and Streamlight light. Arisaka light mount and Streamlight to Surefire tail cap adapter. Cloud Defense switch mount. Troy folding sights. VTAC sling.

The scope and mount weigh 1.6 pounds.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210417/a5d377161d06b4aa556da394ac9fe00e.jpg

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

Who makes the SF to stream light adapter?

[Default.mp3]

Who makes the SF to stream light adapter?Looks like the Arisaka: https://arisakadefense.com/tailcap-adapter-streamlight-protac-railmount-hl-x/ (https://arisakadefense.com/tailcap-adapter-streamlight-protac-railmount-1-2/)

[Tokarev]

Looks like the Arisaka: https://arisakadefense.com/tailcap-adapter-streamlight-protac-railmount-hl-x/ (https://arisakadefense.com/tailcap-adapter-streamlight-protac-railmount-1-2/)


Who makes the SF to stream light adapter?

Yep. That's another great product from Will at Arisaka.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[dontshakepandas]

Yep. That's another great product from Will at Arisaka.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

Arisaka is great, but by the time you buy the Streamlight and the adapter you should have just bought a Surefire, REIN, or Modlite to begin with.

The light + adapter + tailcap + wire from the switch looks like it’s 11 inches long. If you are concerned about the weight and footprint of your LPVO that should concern you too since it takes up real estate you may need for your hands.

Slightly more on topic.... I’ve decided to change my Unity Tactical FAST Aimpoint + Magnifier setup for a Kahles K16i. I acquired two new guns that will be in home defense roles with dots only (10.3” ar15 and 1301 tactical) so that rifle will no longer be used for that purpose. As such, I’m using it more as a general purpose gun and would like to have more of a balance between close/far performance instead of prioritizing closer engagements.

[HCM]

Arisaka is great, but by the time you buy the Streamlight and the adapter you should have just bought a Surefire, REIN, or Modlite to begin with.

The light + adapter + tailcap + wire from the switch looks like it’s 11 inches long. If you are concerned about the weight and footprint of your LPVO that should concern you too since it takes up real estate you may need for your hands.

Slightly more on topic.... I’ve decided to change my Unity Tactical FAST Aimpoint + Magnifier setup for a Kahles K16i. I acquired two new guns that will be in home defense roles with dots only (10.3” ar15 and 1301 tactical) so that rifle will no longer be used for that purpose. As such, I’m using it more as a general purpose gun and would like to have more of a balance between close/far performance instead of prioritizing closer engagements.

Yes, unless you or your agency already have streamlights, or only streamlights are authorized. It’s good to have options.

[Tokarev]

Yes, unless you or your agency already have streamlights, or only streamlights are authorized. It’s good to have options.Surefire and Streamlight are both authorized.

Streamlight does not make a DS tail cap so the adapter is needed if a pressure pad and constant on are wanted in a tail cap. And while Streamlight's pressure switch has a button for constant on it is longer than the Surefire pad and takes up more rail space. As a result some agents have complained that the Streamlight pressure pad is easier to ND with.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

Arisaka is great, but by the time you buy the Streamlight and the adapter you should have just bought a Surefire, REIN, or Modlite to begin with.

Slightly more on I’ve decided to change my Unity Tactical FAST Aimpoint + Magnifier setup for a Kahles K16i.

So the dude who buys a Kahles optic is going to comment on the price of a flashlight? [emoji38]

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[HCM]

Surefire and Streamlight are both authorized.

Streamlight does not make a DS tail cap so the adapter is needed if a pressure pad and constant on are wanted in a tail cap. And while Streamlight's pressure switch has a button for constant on it is longer than the Surefire pad and takes up more rail space. As a result some agents have complained that the Streamlight pressure pad is easier to ND with.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

Streamlight’s tape switches are not their strong suite.

[Tokarev]

Streamlight’s tape switches are not their strong suite.

Another thing with the Streamlight (although I haven't seen it personally) is that the light can flicker or wink on and off while in sure. The Surefire tail cap and spring seems to be the cure for those that have complained about this as well.



Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[dontshakepandas]

So the dude who buys a Kahles optic is going to comment on the price of a flashlight? [emoji38]

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

It isn’t so much the price, but the value. Having to buy the adapter to use the Streamlight with the same switch options closes the price gap between buying a better light to begin with. It just results in a situation where you’ve spent almost the same amount of money and end up with a result that is “JuSt As GoOd”.

I like some of Streamlights products, like the TLR7A, but I’ve personally had one of their rifle lights fail and seem way too many others reports of it to trust it for serious use.

When it comes to rifles I’m closer to a gear collector than a hard use individual, so it failed under pretty tame circumstances. I’m told the switch is the weak link so using the adapter may have solved the problem, but I haven’t ever had an issue with my Surefires or Modlites. I wish I had just spent more and got one of those the first time, it would have cost me less in the long run.

If Streamlight is your only option due to departmental reasons, you obviously have to make the best of what you have and the adapter to use better pressure switches makes sense in that situation.

[rob_s]

Streamlight light. Arisaka light mount and Streamlight to Surefire tail cap adapter. Cloud Defense switch mount.


Who makes the SF to stream light adapter?


Looks like the Arisaka: https://arisakadefense.com/tailcap-adapter-streamlight-protac-railmount-hl-x/ (https://arisakadefense.com/tailcap-adapter-streamlight-protac-railmount-1-2/)


Yep. That's another great product from Will at Arisaka.


Arisaka is great, but by the time you buy the Streamlight and the adapter you should have just bought a Surefire, REIN, or Modlite to begin with.

The light + adapter + tailcap + wire from the switch looks like it’s 11 inches long. If you are concerned about the weight and footprint of your LPVO that should concern you too since it takes up real estate you may need for your hands.


Sorry to continue the hijack but this is exactly my initial thought as well. Wholly shit that’s a lot of fiddlefucking parts and pieces.

[Tokarev]

Sorry to continue the hijack but this is exactly my initial thought as well. Wholly shit that’s a lot of fiddlefucking parts and pieces.

It is just an adapter with internal threads on one side and external threads on the other. Pretty simple, really.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[TCB]

I didn’t know we had Steiner LPVO in our inventory? Nice! A buddy got hooked up with a NF 1-8 a bit ago and he’s over the moon with it...I finally retired my H-1 and got a T-2 to replace it, super clean dot with my 3x.

[Tokarev]

I didn’t know we had Steiner LPVO in our inventory? Nice! A buddy got hooked up with a NF 1-8 a bit ago and he’s over the moon with it...I finally retired my H-1 and got a T-2 to replace it, super clean dot with my 3x.Yep. Just got them in. LESC has given me approval via email and they will be listed in the next AEL.

Once FACTS investory is over I'll push them out to the stations.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[TCB]

Very cool, I don’t have enough time behind a LPVO to make the jump quite yet from a RDO but it’s a step in the right direction. I guess I need to start shooting my personal rifle with the NX8 more on it and see if it makes sense to make the jump at some point...but I do love my micros...BTW what model Steiner is that?
ETA: pic...because more USBP F/A SBR is cool.

70302

[Tokarev]

Very cool, I don’t have enough time behind a LPVO to make the jump quite yet from a RDO but it’s a step in the right direction. I guess I need to start shooting my personal rifle with the NX8 more on it and see if it makes sense to make the jump at some point...but I do move my micros...BTW what model Steiner is that?
ETA: pic...because more USBP F/A SBR is cool.

70302

Here is a link to the Steiner website for optic specs:

https://www.steiner-optics.com/riflescopes/p4xi-1-4x24

Please check the current AEL. I do not believe that light and ring combo is authorized.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[TCB]

👍 & will do!

[Tokarev]

Very cool, I don’t have enough time behind a LPVO to make the jump quite yet from a RDO

The ATACR is great optically. Clear and bright with little distortion at 1x. But it also suffers from the problem of too small/too big a reticle as is pretty much the deal across the board with FFP scopes.

Also it is too expensive especially when we still have something like 500 old EO Tech optics that should be replaced. Plus that optic is overkill for a 14.5" Colt that has an A-frame front sight and may or may not have a plastic handguard. At best the Knight or Troy rail. Yes we have a number of newer 14.5 and 11.5" carbines with the BCM rail but most are still the legacy GI pattern.

My desire to procure the Steiner is based on a couple things:

Cost. If these can be purchased at a price that's not too far above some of the authorized red dots, the choice is kind of a no brainer.

Versatility. As we've seen in our Ft Huachuca carbine class, agents have no problem hitting a USPSA target at 300 yards with 11.5" guns and red dots. That's all well and good but can a positive thread ID be made at this distance with a red dot? What about at early morning or late evening?

Brightness. The Steiner uses a rather plain Jane crosshair reticle with an illuminated center dot. So far the illumination seems quite usable across a variety of backgrounds and lighting conditions.

Weight. The optic and ADM mount is 1.6 pounds. Not the lightest thing out there but not terrible. Depending on what mounts end up on the upcoming optics contract we may be able to shave a couple ounces off this.

Simplicity. Capped turrets and a throw lever are good in this regard. Only issue I forsee is someone running the optic at 4x for whatever reason and then forgetting to dial it back down to 1x for general carry. But that 4x is what many guys are running now with their surplus ACOG so it shouldn't be a deal killer. Plus we can hopefully drill/train guys to get in the habit of checking the optic periodically to make sure it is on 1x

Unknowns at this point are long-term durability. Agents can and do break pretty much everything. Just a matter of how soon. I am also curious about the battery life if left on while turned into the Armory, etc. But there are off settings between brightness settings so hopefully guys will just give the knob one click as they turn them in at the end of shift.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Nephrology]

Very cool, I don’t have enough time behind a LPVO to make the jump quite yet from a RDO but it’s a step in the right direction. I guess I need to start shooting my personal rifle with the NX8 more on it and see if it makes sense to make the jump at some point...but I do love my micros...BTW what model Steiner is that?
ETA: pic...because more USBP F/A SBR is cool.

70302

What WML is that? Issued?

[Wake27]

The ATACR is great optically. Clear and bright with little distortion at 1x. But it also suffers from the problem of too small/too big a reticle as is pretty much the deal across the board with FFP scopes.

Also it is too expensive especially when we still have something like 500 old EO Tech optics that should be replaced. Plus that optic is overkill for a 14.5" Colt that has an A-frame front sight and may or may not have a plastic handguard. At best the Knight or Troy rail. Yes we have a number of newer 14.5 and 11.5" carbines with the BCM rail but most are still the legacy GI pattern.

My desire to procure the Steiner is based on a couple things:

Cost. If these can be purchased at a price that's not too far above some of the authorized red dots, the choice is kind of a no brainer.

Versatility. As we've seen in our Ft Huachuca carbine class, agents have no problem hitting a USPSA target at 300 yards with 11.5" guns and red dots. That's all well and good but can a positive thread ID be made at this distance with a red dot? What about at early morning or late evening?

Brightness. The Steiner uses a rather plain Jane crosshair reticle with an illuminated center dot. So far the illumination seems quite usable across a variety of backgrounds and lighting conditions.

Weight. The optic and ADM mount is 1.6 pounds. Not the lightest thing out there but not terrible. Depending on what mounts end up on the upcoming optics contract we may be able to shave a couple ounces off this.

Simplicity. Capped turrets and a throw lever are good in this regard. Only issue I forsee is someone running the optic at 4x for whatever reason and then forgetting to dial it back down to 1x for general carry. But that 4x is what many guys are running now with their surplus ACOG so it shouldn't be a deal killer. Plus we can hopefully drill/train guys to get in the habit of checking the optic periodically to make sure it is on 1x

Unknowns at this point are long-term durability. Agents can and do break pretty much everything. Just a matter of how soon. I am also curious about the battery life if left on while turned into the Armory, etc. But there are off settings between brightness settings so hopefully guys will just give the knob one click as they turn them in at the end of shift.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

I liked my P4 quite a bit but traded it in for a Razor. They’d still be super relevant if Steiner didn’t raise the price a few years ago.

It didn’t take much for me to build a habit of pushing the throw lever back to 1x every so often and definitely before every stage on a match. I’m sure most of your guys that are trying them out will build that in fairly easily.

And I’m not sure if I said it in this thread already but the LPVO clicked much better for me with a 1.7 Badger C1 Mount. Very expensive in comparison and not QD but the only one that I’m aware of that places the optic at a natural height for many people.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

Leupold has a new Mark 3 line with a couple LPVO options.

https://www.leupold.com/blog/post/leupold-announces-launch-of-new-for-2021-mark-3hd-line-of-riflescopes

https://www.leupold.com/shop/riflescopes/series/mark-3hd-rifle-scope

I assume these are a replacement for the VX-R line of scopes.

Check the specs on the 1.5-4x20mm. At 9.6 ounces it is lighter than an EO Tech 552 or EXPS. Granted those have a built-in mount. Down side is battery life which is listed at 300 hours on max.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[mrozowjj]

Leupold has a new Mark 3 line with a couple LPVO options.

https://www.leupold.com/blog/post/leupold-announces-launch-of-new-for-2021-mark-3hd-line-of-riflescopes

https://www.leupold.com/shop/riflescopes/series/mark-3hd-rifle-scope

I assume these are a replacement for the VX-R line of scopes.

Check the specs on the 1.5-4x20mm. At 9.6 ounces it is lighter than an EO Tech 552 or EXPS. Granted those have a built-in mount. Down side is battery life which is listed at 300 hours on max.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

This one in particularily appealing but it doesn't appear to have any illumination
https://www.leupold.com/mark-3hd-1-5-4x20-ar-ballistic

If it was a 1.5-6x I would buy one in a heartbeat.

[Caballoflaco]

Leupold has a new Mark 3 line with a couple LPVO options.

https://www.leupold.com/blog/post/leupold-announces-launch-of-new-for-2021-mark-3hd-line-of-riflescopes

https://www.leupold.com/shop/riflescopes/series/mark-3hd-rifle-scope

I assume these are a replacement for the VX-R line of scopes.

Check the specs on the 1.5-4x20mm. At 9.6 ounces it is lighter than an EO Tech 552 or EXPS. Granted those have a built-in mount. Down side is battery life which is listed at 300 hours on max.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

Is Beaverton Oregon stuck in some sort of a time bubble where they can’t advance beyond 2002?

Product manager :“Hey let’s make an LPV with 1.5x bottom end and 4x max and price it at $700”

Engineer: “Thats a great idea! I’ll get started right after I watch this new episode of Friends”

[Tokarev]

Is Beaverton Oregon stuck in some sort of a time bubble where they can’t advance beyond 2002?

Product manager :“Hey let’s make an LPV with 1.5x bottom end and 4x max and price it at $700”

Engineer: “Thats a great idea! I’ll get started right after I watch this new episode of Friends”I don't disagree but Leupold does have other scopes with more "current" features. The VX-6HD comes readily to mind as does Mark 5 and 6 line.

With that said I'd preferred something closer to 1x at the low end certainly. If anything kills the new Mark 3 LPVO it will be the 1.5x minimum.



Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk