Current State of the RDS for Carbines

[spinmove_]

As the OP of the thread, I find it extremely relevant and am glad to see their business practices as part of the discussion. Part of the "current state" is that they appear to be rather shady, and some people would prefer not to do business with shady entities.

That said, I think we've established the history pretty well and probably don't need to beat on the horse.

Agreed. If it weren't for the fact that a holographic reticle was way less bloomy to my astimatized eyes, then they wouldn't even be anywhere near close to being on my radar.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[HCM]

Bumping this instead of starting a new thread. Who here has actually used the LCO ?

Had a chance to look through one and it had fish eye and something inside it seemed to be reflecting on the lense -there was a yellowish tunnel effect on the far sides of the FOV.

[arcfide]

I gave up on red dots because of astigmatism. They were just too frustrating to use. The 2 MOA Aimpoints seemed to work best for me. I would love to see the new Eotechs, because the old one I looked at a few years ago literally reminded me of looking at an orange pumpkin. I had almost no visibility through the optic, and certainly couldn't see any small dot inside of a circle. It was like a 60 MOA pumpkin reticle that you could plop on the side of your barn and get some chance of hitting it if you were standing within 15 yards of said barn. Yet, I know other people say that their astigmatism works better with Eotechs.

That makes it really hard to recommend optics, because everyone sees a little differently than you.

I eventually gave up on trying to be lightweight and put a T5Xi 1-5x24mm LPV on my ARX.

I would still love to play with an LCO + D-EVO combo some time, though. I always liked that design.

[spinmove_]

I gave up on red dots because of astigmatism. They were just too frustrating to use. The 2 MOA Aimpoints seemed to work best for me. I would love to see the new Eotechs, because the old one I looked at a few years ago literally reminded me of looking at an orange pumpkin. I had almost no visibility through the optic, and certainly couldn't see any small dot inside of a circle. It was like a 60 MOA pumpkin reticle that you could plop on the side of your barn and get some chance of hitting it if you were standing within 15 yards of said barn. Yet, I know other people say that their astigmatism works better with Eotechs.

That makes it really hard to recommend optics, because everyone sees a little differently than you.

I eventually gave up on trying to be lightweight and put a T5Xi 1-5x24mm LPV on my ARX.

I would still love to play with an LCO + D-EVO combo some time, though. I always liked that design.

I’ve looked through a few red dots in the past few months and just about all of them give me star bursts or comets for a sight picture. I looked through an EXPS2-0 and had MUCH better results.

With no eyewear correction and looking through one with my right eye (my “bad” eye) I could get some image stacking, but it could work in a pinch a little better than just about any red dot I’ve seen thus far. With my left eye (dominant eye) uncorrected I had almost no difference in what I saw corrected. I admit, it has me thinking.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[jellydonut]

I've got the same issue with Aimpoints due to being nearsighted, dot just looks like a Rorschach blot without glasses. It's not like I can see shit downrange without corrective vision anyway so I don't consider this a drawback of the RDS.

[Gater]

Bumping this again...question remains the same.

My 10 year old 4 MOA dot Micro H-1 is still chugging along, as is my older .170 hole FCG 6920 that it is mounted on.

Having just put a new 6960 upper on the rifle, I'm wondering what is out there that might be an upgrade, optics-wise. The H-1 is certainly usable, but the dot does not play nicely with my astigmatism, there is some tint, and I pick up a good bit of glow in the 9-12 o'clock quadrant of the sight.

I had hopes that the MRO would do it for me, as I was digging the idea of a larger field of view and had heard the dot worked better for some folks' astigmatisms. Cost is attractive, too. I recently had the chance to handle a current production one, and it was not what I had hoped. Dot was more of a blotch to my eye than the 4 MOA H-1, and the tint worse.

I need to take a closer look at a T-2 to see if it makes a difference, but even if it does, the price tag is steep. EO Tech might work better with the astigmatism...I'll try to get a look through a current production unit, but I'm not digging the weight or battery life.

This is a personal training gun and I just killed the discretionary spending for a while, so this is curiosity, for the most part.

[CS Tactical]

Bumping this again...question remains the same.

My 10 year old 4 MOA dot Micro H-1 is still chugging along, as is my older .170 hole FCG 6920 that it is mounted on.

Having just put a new 6960 upper on the rifle, I'm wondering what is out there that might be an upgrade, optics-wise. The H-1 is certainly usable, but the dot does not play nicely with my astigmatism, there is some tint, and I pick up a good bit of glow in the 9-12 o'clock quadrant of the sight.

I had hopes that the MRO would do it for me, as I was digging the idea of a larger field of view and had heard the dot worked better for some folks' astigmatisms. Cost is attractive, too. I recently had the chance to handle a current production one, and it was not what I had hoped. Dot was more of a blotch to my eye than the 4 MOA H-1, and the tint worse.

I need to take a closer look at a T-2 to see if it makes a difference, but even if it does, the price tag is steep. EO Tech might work better with the astigmatism...I'll try to get a look through a current production unit, but I'm not digging the weight or battery life.

This is a personal training gun and I just killed the discretionary spending for a while, so this is curiosity, for the most part.

Give us a ring at 916-670-1103 and let me see what I can do for you on the T-2, the improvements on it have helped with my astigmatism and I'm sure you will see the difference from the H-1.

To quote an SME on this discussion we were having recently:

The CompM5 checks lots of boxes in the RDS world and is clearly the top of the Aimpoint line. It's overbuilt like the CompM4 (M68 CCO), uses common batteries, will take a 45 knot water impact on the front lens surface, has a five year battery life and uses commonly available Micro mounting solutions. It's pricey, but when you look at the performance, longevity and durability, then informed users can tell they're getting solid value.

I do tell folks to use quality American brand lithium batteries in Aimpoints if at all possible. Using poor or questionable quality batteries can and will lead to damaging or ruining the sight.

Also, with regard to astigmatism and Aimpoints: the second generation Micros (H-2 and T-2) along with the CompM5 have optics packages that have eliminated dot distortion for most of the population with astigmatism issues.

[rob_s]

As a guy with an astigmatism but who is nowhere near as obsessed with guns as I once was, the M5 is extremely attractive to me as I’ve tired of anything using specialized batteries, long-lived or not.

Of course, being nowhere near as obsessed with guns as I once was, the price is a little off-putting. The Larue package, which appears to be the optic plus mount for the same price as the MAP for the optic alone, is an attractove offering. Even if I don’t really want a Larue Mount.
https://www.larue.com/products/aimpo...ical-qd-mount/

[texasaggie2005]

Bumping this again...question remains the same.

My 10 year old 4 MOA dot Micro H-1 is still chugging along, as is my older .170 hole FCG 6920 that it is mounted on.

Having just put a new 6960 upper on the rifle, I'm wondering what is out there that might be an upgrade, optics-wise. The H-1 is certainly usable, but the dot does not play nicely with my astigmatism, there is some tint, and I pick up a good bit of glow in the 9-12 o'clock quadrant of the sight.

I had hopes that the MRO would do it for me, as I was digging the idea of a larger field of view and had heard the dot worked better for some folks' astigmatisms. Cost is attractive, too. I recently had the chance to handle a current production one, and it was not what I had hoped. Dot was more of a blotch to my eye than the 4 MOA H-1, and the tint worse.

I need to take a closer look at a T-2 to see if it makes a difference, but even if it does, the price tag is steep. EO Tech might work better with the astigmatism...I'll try to get a look through a current production unit, but I'm not digging the weight or battery life.

This is a personal training gun and I just killed the discretionary spending for a while, so this is curiosity, for the most part.

I have to agree with @WayneDobbs. I found the T2/M5 to have a noticeable improvement over the T1/H1. The MRO sat somewhere in between for me.

As a guy with an astigmatism but who is nowhere near as obsessed with guns as I once was, the M5 is extremely attractive to me as I’ve tired of anything using specialized batteries, long-lived or not.

Of course, being nowhere near as obsessed with guns as I once was, the price is a little off-putting. The Larue package, which appears to be the optic plus mount for the same price as the MAP for the optic alone, is an attractove offering. Even if I don’t really want a Larue Mount.
https://www.larue.com/products/aimpo...ical-qd-mount/

FYI, Geissele offers a M5 + G mount package for the same price as LaRue.

[rob_s]

FYI, Geissele offers a M5 + G mount package for the same price as LaRue.

Well that's good news, thanks! I'd prefer that mount in pretty much every way over the Larue. I had no idea Geissele was making mounts (see above re: not as into guns as I once was...)