Red Dots, "way of the dinosaur"

[LittleLebowski]

I found a recent podcast with Jocko really interesting. The gentleman he hosted was one of the first seal teams to field the Scar in Afghanistan. He talks about if it was windy and the Taliban knew they were 400-500 yards out they could basically get away with walking around at that distance because the 5.56 got pushed around so easily. He then talks about why they loved the Scar in 7.62 as they were making hits easily at those distances and out to 800. I think people get wrapped up in what is theoretically possible and what guys in the field experience. This isn't to say that Defoor doesn't have that experience, he does whole sale. There is also a video of him, I will see if I can find it, where he describes 5.56 guns, even with 77 grain, as a 300 yard and in gun for realistic combat. I am also pretty vocal about SBR 5.56 guns having there place, and thats for about 100 yards and in.

Just food for thought..

Textbook case for 6.5 Grendel.

[Old Man Winter]

For a 5.56 carbine (14.5" to 16"), how does the Kahles K16i 1-6x24 compare to the Nightforce NX8 1-8X24 F1?
They are both the same weight, the Kahles is longer but apparently has a more forgiving eye box?

On a 5.56 carbine I would run the optic that is better at 1x.

[UNM1136]

Textbook case for 6.5 Grendel.

And the 6.5 creedmoor. Sorry, that is the camp I have decided to support. I decided to give my kids .300BO, but I REALLY, REALLY like the Creedmoor...but I bought my oldest daughter a .260REM for hunting, and the other two brats are getting .300BOs. If my other two want to hunt elk/moose, and are not impressed with the .300BO the Creedmoor is there for them.

pat

[ASH556]

For this rifle neophyte a forgiving eyebox is like priority 1 through 3. I'd have to really need distance to trade up from an awesome eyebox 1-4 for a 6X or 8X.


How do the best of breed compare in that area as the upper magnification climbs?

I haven't had the opportunity to compare those aspects side by side. However, I will say that in my experience (hunting deer in the N. GA woods and shooting 3gun) the whole idea that "I either run the scope on 1X or max mag" is SEVERELY flawed.

I've watched guys flat out miss (like, didn't even shoot at them) targets at 75yds because they had their Razor dialed up to 6X.

We need to break this mentality that magnification = distance. That's only a part of the puzzle. What magnification really equals is precision. Further, it equals providing the shooter with an acceptable enough sight picture to identify the target and place the round as precisely as he needs to. Whether it's an eyeball at 47 yds (as Pressburg says) or a torso at 600yds.

Because of this, I'm a huge fan of FFP in an LPVO. The holds are always right. Furthermore, if I have a center aiming dot that is too large/coarse for the shot I need to make, I can shrink it down a bit with a FFP optic. I can't do that with a SFP. I'm stuck with whatever the MFR gave me.

As far as 1X goes, the scope absolutely needs to be workable. Both the NX8 and the Kahles are definitely workable on 1X with or without illumination. As to how much more or less workable they are than each other, that's probably very shooter dependent.

How much variation do we see in preference of pistol sights (FO vs tritium, wide vs narrow rear, wide vs narrow front, black vs painted, U-notch vs square, etc). We should expect to see similar preferences in optics. It's just tougher because we're talking a $1,500-2,000 scope instead of a $150 set of sights. At the same time, there are some "clues."

[TiroFijo]

I haven't had the opportunity to compare those aspects side by side. However, I will say that in my experience (hunting deer in the N. GA woods and shooting 3gun) the whole idea that "I either run the scope on 1X or max mag" is SEVERELY flawed.

I've watched guys flat out miss (like, didn't even shoot at them) targets at 75yds because they had their Razor dialed up to 6X.

We need to break this mentality that magnification = distance. That's only a part of the puzzle. What magnification really equals is precision. Further, it equals providing the shooter with an acceptable enough sight picture to identify the target and place the round as precisely as he needs to. Whether it's an eyeball at 47 yds (as Pressburg says) or a torso at 600yds.

Because of this, I'm a huge fan of FFP in an LPVO. The holds are always right. Furthermore, if I have a center aiming dot that is too large/coarse for the shot I need to make, I can shrink it down a bit with a FFP optic. I can't do that with a SFP. I'm stuck with whatever the MFR gave me.

As far as 1X goes, the scope absolutely needs to be workable. Both the NX8 and the Kahles are definitely workable on 1X with or without illumination. As to how much more or less workable they are than each other, that's probably very shooter dependent.

How much variation do we see in preference of pistol sights (FO vs tritium, wide vs narrow rear, wide vs narrow front, black vs painted, U-notch vs square, etc). We should expect to see similar preferences in optics. It's just tougher because we're talking a $1,500-2,000 scope instead of a $150 set of sights. At the same time, there are some "clues."

How much faster or more accurate are reticle holds compared to kentucky windage within 300-350 m or so? I'm talking about an experienced shooter that has ingrained "holds" (favor left or right a certain distance) for a given gun/load/conditions.

[ASH556]

How much faster or more accurate are reticle holds compared to kentucky windage within 300-350 m or so? I'm talking about an experienced shooter that has ingrained "holds" (favor left or right a certain distance) for a given gun/load/conditions.

300, probably not a huge deal unless you have tons of wind. At the same time, having hold references for what you "see" (if you miss) is better than Kentucky Windage.

[StraitR]

I haven't had the opportunity to compare those aspects side by side. However, I will say that in my experience (hunting deer in the N. GA woods and shooting 3gun) the whole idea that "I either run the scope on 1X or max mag" is SEVERELY flawed.

I've watched guys flat out miss (like, didn't even shoot at them) targets at 75yds because they had their Razor dialed up to 6X.

We need to break this mentality that magnification = distance. That's only a part of the puzzle. What magnification really equals is precision. Further, it equals providing the shooter with an acceptable enough sight picture to identify the target and place the round as precisely as he needs to. Whether it's an eyeball at 47 yds (as Pressburg says) or a torso at 600yds.

Because of this, I'm a huge fan of FFP in an LPVO. The holds are always right. Furthermore, if I have a center aiming dot that is too large/coarse for the shot I need to make, I can shrink it down a bit with a FFP optic. I can't do that with a SFP. I'm stuck with whatever the MFR gave me.

As far as 1X goes, the scope absolutely needs to be workable. Both the NX8 and the Kahles are definitely workable on 1X with or without illumination. As to how much more or less workable they are than each other, that's probably very shooter dependent.

How much variation do we see in preference of pistol sights (FO vs tritium, wide vs narrow rear, wide vs narrow front, black vs painted, U-notch vs square, etc). We should expect to see similar preferences in optics. It's just tougher because we're talking a $1,500-2,000 scope instead of a $150 set of sights. At the same time, there are some "clues."

This is the most reasonable explanation, that I've ever read, of "why FFP on a 5.66 gun".

[Tokarev]

Steiner 1-5 mounted with an ADM recon mount.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

Steiner 1-5 mounted with an ADM recon mount.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

There is a weight penalty to this. As pictured with sling, light, optic and 45° offsets the gun weighs nine pounds.

Same gun with BUIS but no sling is 6.2 pounds.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[rob_s]

So for the 1-X optic proponents, what's the "budget" FFP go-to?

I believe Defoor is a proponent of FFP, but then turns around and suggests the Vortex as the budget option, which is SFP? Unless I missed something...