This is also something to keep in mimed when selecting the brightness level for your aimpoints.Originally Posted by El Cid
This is also something to keep in mimed when selecting the brightness level for your aimpoints.
I find that 5 or 6 is good for dark of night and still reasonably good for lighted conditions. Plus I can pick up the dot if I employ my white light.
That's where I leave mine set. Always on.
There's nothing civil about this war.
Trijicon MRO on mine.
Last edited by Clusterfrack; 01-01-2017 at 04:16 PM.
“There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
"You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
I have a Vortex Sparc II on my AR 9 Pistol ...That's my primary HD combine with my Glock 19
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Aimpoint pro. Micros are not worth the cost for a HD carbine..
Please just add "in my opinion" to your blanket statement. The worth of a particular optic goes beyond just its price, imho.
If we're going to go down the rabbit hole of arguing what is and isn't worth the price paid there wouldn't be a civil discussion on this site (for very long).
Last edited by blues; 01-01-2017 at 07:42 PM.
There's nothing civil about this war.
PCC (Pistol Caliber Carbine) in USPSA, is a great venue to get a bunch of shooting in with a carbine at home defense distances. It is also an interesting place to sort out how different optics work in the muzzle to 35 yard envelope.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
Sorry I wont, but I think I get where your coming from. 30mm aimpoints are their most proven and battle tested optic, micros seem to be fine also. Micros are light and look high speed, they also have a narrowed field of view and demand almost 2x the cost. What reasons besides weight, which for most of us (civilians or FAGS) doesn't matter anymore, does a micro add? I know the T2 looks pretty good behind a magnifier but that is about it.
Last edited by breakingtime91; 01-01-2017 at 08:09 PM.
The weight and balance matter to me. I train with both eyes open so I work on my FOV and peripheral vision. I can afford a micro and the difference in price at the time I bought from LaRue compared to what the PRO was going for was insignificant when the time frame I hope to own it for was factored in, let alone the cost of ammunition over various periods of time.
The clarity of the optic (the H2 has brighter and truer color, (I forget the correct term) updated coatings and electronics compared to the PRO and earlier micros) etc.
In the end we can argue all day about what makes one gun, optic, knife, pack, holster etc worth more to an individual whether in some measurable way or as a matter of opinion.
Whether you agree or not, and I respect your opinion, it's still your opinion and not some ironclad law. In my personal opinion, the amount more I paid for the H2 over the PRO (which I had ordered and canceled) was worth it. I still think the PRO is a great optic. I simply chose the one which was right for me.
No hard feelings whether you agree with me or not and it's not my intent to derail the discussion further.
Last edited by blues; 01-01-2017 at 08:23 PM.
There's nothing civil about this war.
This and I'd offer similar advice if one wants to try any of the 1x4/6 type optics.
I prefer a 1x4 on my rifles whether it's designated as a home defense rifle or for other purposes.
Last edited by Paul Sharp; 01-01-2017 at 09:18 PM.
"There is magic in misery. You need to constantly fail. Always bite off more than you can chew, put yourself in situations where you don't succeed then really analyze why you didn't succeed." - Dean Karnazes www.sbgillinois.com
Reply With Quote
