Comparative Study of Red Dot Sight Parallax

[dopushups]

Intermediate range to CQB with possible magnifier use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, I had typed up a response here that asked additional questions to determine the intended use but realized that it could derail this thread. Feel free to hit me up today- the email and phone number on my website goes to me.

[dopushups]

I'm aware that the report on my website has issues with some browsers. It was converted from .docx with a plugin. So, here are some direct links:

Original PDF format of the report (view or download): https://www.dropbox.com/s/5zgsq2kq6j...rt%20.pdf?dl=0

Interactive webpage (yes, we actually made one): https://public.tableau.com/profile/l...ics/OpticStory

File containing full test protocols, instructions, forms, etc (if you would like to replicate it): https://www.dropbox.com/sh/obpot49wn...XjxXthzba?dl=0

I have also added all of these links to the top of the report page linked in the OP of this thread.

[NH Shooter]

I truly appreciate this information, thanks for posting it here. The video is very telling and as you have stated, users can decide for themselves if it is a consideration that impacts their own use. It's perfectly reasonable to expect that for some it will be an issue, but for others not so much.

Every sighting system - whether is be LPV, fixed power, RDS or irons - has advantages and disadvantages. The better users are informed, the better position they are in to make the right choice for their specific needs and expectations.

My hat is off to you for your contributions to the conversation.

[Dagga Boy]

I am getting ready for a class and vacation, so I ll make this short and sweet and be done. Up till 2 years ago I worked LE Pro staff for Aimpoint. Seen tons of the Micro series sights from inception. Most folks who have ever heard me discuss them with LE know I don’t use the term “Paralax free” because nothing out there really is. Contextually, and within the design envelope, they are close. It is a tiny sight with a small window. It isn’t designed to be a scope. It is a great fit for shotguns, subguns and PDW’s and other platforms where small size is the need. I have always preferred the larger tube sights to magnify or for most uses on longer range weapons like rifles.

Here is my issue with all this. Haven’t looked at the Green Eyes stuff because I was turned off by the entire premise. This started with the T1 being “banned” at classes there. Bans in our industry are for dangerous and unsafe things. That immediately flys in the face of what I have seen personally in tons of classes, teaching, using and seeing the Micros deployed in the field against real bad guys by LE. They are reliable in all conditions and lighting, are made to be on all the time, hold zero in harsh environments and have been used by many officers to deliver solid hits on bad folks in dynamic fluid encounters and their design allows for both eyes open shooting without the cheekweld necessary for using iron sights and without the lighting limitations of iron sights. If someone wants to ban them because in whatever area they are using them they have determined them to be unsafe...great. Not my experience, not the experience of folks like Pat Rogers who was one of the biggest advocates of the Micros out there. Same with Vickers and others. For me, most know I am really a shotgun person and the Micro is the best sight I have found for that application. To give folks the idea that they are unsafe or dangerous is counter to what I have found.
As far as publicity and driving traffic to an organization.....if the traffic to Green Eyes was the same or more before the banning of the Aimpoint Micro than after that action, well I ll apologize now if it has not driven higher traffic. As most know, I am the absolute poster boy for not doing social media and web stuff, mainly because I think it creates tons of drama with no context.

In a nutshell, the Aimpoint T1 is not at Serpa level of unsafe that requires being banned at training facilities. If Green Eyes finds them unsafe enough to ban great. Buy something else or bring something else that is not going to cause issues there.

[Wayne Dobbs]

Osama bin Laden hates the T-1...just sayin'

[dopushups]

I am getting ready for a class and vacation, so I ll make this short and sweet and be done. Up till 2 years ago I worked LE Pro staff for Aimpoint. Seen tons of the Micro series sights from inception. Most folks who have ever heard me discuss them with LE know I don’t use the term “Paralax free” because nothing out there really is. Contextually, and within the design envelope, they are close. It is a tiny sight with a small window. It isn’t designed to be a scope. It is a great fit for shotguns, subguns and PDW’s and other platforms where small size is the need. I have always preferred the larger tube sights to magnify or for most uses on longer range weapons like rifles.

Here is my issue with all this. Haven’t looked at the Green Eyes stuff because I was turned off by the entire premise. This started with the T1 being “banned” at classes there. Bans in our industry are for dangerous and unsafe things. That immediately flys in the face of what I have seen personally in tons of classes, teaching, using and seeing the Micros deployed in the field against real bad guys by LE. They are reliable in all conditions and lighting, are made to be on all the time, hold zero in harsh environments and have been used by many officers to deliver solid hits on bad folks in dynamic fluid encounters and their design allows for both eyes open shooting without the cheekweld necessary for using iron sights and without the lighting limitations of iron sights. If someone wants to ban them because in whatever area they are using them they have determined them to be unsafe...great. Not my experience, not the experience of folks like Pat Rogers who was one of the biggest advocates of the Micros out there. Same with Vickers and others. For me, most know I am really a shotgun person and the Micro is the best sight I have found for that application. To give folks the idea that they are unsafe or dangerous is counter to what I have found.
As far as publicity and driving traffic to an organization.....if the traffic to Green Eyes was the same or more before the banning of the Aimpoint Micro than after that action, well I ll apologize now if it has not driven higher traffic. As most know, I am the absolute poster boy for not doing social media and web stuff, mainly because I think it creates tons of drama with no context.

In a nutshell, the Aimpoint T1 is not at Serpa level of unsafe that requires being banned at training facilities. If Green Eyes finds them unsafe enough to ban great. Buy something else or bring something else that is not going to cause issues there.

Obviously you like the T-1, great.

As you said- you haven't read the report so that may be where you are taking things out of context. So, let's clear up a few things, again:

1- What training facilities are T-1's banned at? I banned it from 1 of my courses. Only one.

2- Where have I said they were unsafe or dangerous? Please feel free to quote me. If I did somehow say this, I would like to correct the record, because that is not my position on the T-1.

Bans in our industry are NOT solely for dangerous and unsafe gear.

Ban: To officially or legally prohibit (something).

The word "ban" is to merely dissallow its use. If something is unsafe then there is a Safety of Use Memorandum put out. I've never said that they were dangerous or unsafe, and that was not the reason they were disallowed from one of my courses. It is simply that it did not perform in a manner that was appropriate for the training, period. The format of the course in question is fairly unique and I am not aware of its format being used for the tactical rifle, which may explain why you haven't seen it as an issue before. I rarely see any issues with the T-1 in aany of my other courses, other than my Night Vision Operator course, where the lens tint can cause some loss of brightness when the user attempts to engage, using the optic- especially at intermediate distances in low lum conditions. Many pieces of gear are not allowed in a variety of courses for a variety of reasons, it is not always a safety issue. Instructors regularly make descisions as to what equipment is appropriate for their courses based on their trainining format, cirriculum, and observed performance.

I do see that you are fairly close to me. I am in McKinney, Texas. I will extend an offer to you to meet up at one of the ranges I use in the area where we can sit down and run through the test and a live story board shoot. We can post the full results right here, and if it is a complete non-issue then it will be here for all to see. I have consistently extended this offer on multiple other sites as well, so if anyone else wants to take it up, feel free to reach out. If I am incorrect, then I will be the first to openly and honestly say it.

Edit- Second offer: I have a Tactical Rifle Fundamentals course (the course that the T-1 is not allowed in) on the calender for 25-26 August 2018 in Cresson, Texas. If you or anyone who thinks it is unreasonable for me not to allow it in this course wants to- you can attend this course with your T-1, free of charge. The caviat is- I get to photograph your groups, along with the rest of the class and publicly post them.

[NH Shooter]

In a nutshell, the Aimpoint T1 is not at Serpa level of unsafe that requires being banned at training facilities.

I concur. Banning gear outside of a pure and legitimate safety concern is dubious at best. That was Green Eye's call for their own events, and it's their gig so they can certainly specify equipment requirements. Prospective attendees can decide if banning an optic is a deal breaker for them or not.

That (perhaps bad) call aside, the study information provided is enlightening and worthy of consideration. If I ever end up with another RDS I will most certainly check it for parallax to determine how head placement will effect POI with that specific sample of the optic. Most likely an adjustment to the software will largely mitigate any hardware deficiency.

[Dagga Boy]

Like I said before, I our world “bans” are usually reserved for unsafe or dangerous things. As far as the T1 for use with Night Vision equipment....funny, we didn’t recommend them for that either. Dev Group was really the push behind going to a 2 MOA fit for that purpose and then Aimpoint did the T2 series specifically to address the issue with Night Vision devices and magnifiers. Like anything there are gives and takes. Pick the tool for the job....or as Pat used to say mission drives the gear train. Others may see it different, but “T1 banned” is all that was over the net when this started and sent a very bad message whether intended or not.

[dopushups]

Like I said before, I our world “bans” are usually reserved for unsafe or dangerous things. As far as the T1 for use with Night Vision equipment....funny, we didn’t recommend them for that either. Dev Group was really the push behind going to a 2 MOA fit for that purpose and then Aimpoint did the T2 series specifically to address the issue with Night Vision devices and magnifiers. Like anything, there are gives and takes. Pick the tool for the job....or as Pat used to say mission drives the gear train. Others may see it different, but “T1 banned” is all that was over the net when this started and sent a very bad message whether intended or not.

Yeah, we will have different definitions here then. Safety Notices and SOUMs are for safety issues in my world, and most of the LE world I've encountered. A ban is just a ban. I don't like the internet as it is and I don't want to live my life speculating how people are going to take things- so I just lay it out and it is what it is. I still shake my head about how people get mad about the T-1. There's a T-2, it's great and it is one of the two optics I recommend.

[NH Shooter]

I actually thought it was the MRO that was banned... :-0

I was seriously considering a MRO, but holy crap that dot walks all over the target.