Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 116

Thread: In 2019 - It's okay to not have BUIS on your defensive AR

  1. #91
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by PNWTO View Post
    My sole AR will, probably, never have BUIS. I am probably wrong or myopic but I have yet to hear a valid, ass-saving story about BUIS on a carbine.

    However, I do have a CMR-201 on the bottom rail so perhaps that “counts” for this discussion.
    I would say that's acceptable for your purposes. A duty rifle, not so much.

    Might be hard to find an "ass saving" story as that's a fairly strict search parameter within a very undocumented category of mishaps, but there's plenty of people that have had optics failures.

    I had an ACOG come loose on the mount of a duty rifle, which meant the optic was out-of-service until I would have been able to re-zero it. The fact that I had BUIS did not save my ass, as my ass did not become involved in any events which would threaten asses, but the BUIS would have allowed me to continue the mission with an acceptable modicum of capability.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  2. #92
    It's 2019 and it's OK to not have an optical sight on my all around AR..
    Irons only !

  3. #93
    From the likes my post has received maybe I should start another thread on preferred iron sights? I would be interested in what others prefer.

  4. #94
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    The Heart of Tennessee
    Quote Originally Posted by NH Shooter View Post
    No worries, I'm so far out of my lane that I may as well be off-roading. :-/

    My goal with my optic setup was (1) light weight; (2) etched reticle with adjustable ocular and (3) low power fixed magnification. For better or for worse in the upcoming zombie apocalypse, nothing else mattered to me. So I got all three of my main priorities met with a FX-II Ultralight 2.5x20mm scope (how weird is that on an AR?) in a Daniel Defense mount, the scope and mount together weigh 12 ounces. My old eyes can see the Fuddy duplex reticle just fine, and if its too dark to see it, I resort to white light.

    FWIW, the scope has worked out amazingly well for me: crystal-clear optics, long eye relief and a forgiving eye box. It's allegedly tougher than nails (a well-vetted dangerous game rifle scope). The mount seems quite rugged without knobs, nuts or levers sticking out. Best of all, my limited processing power is not tasked with decisions on what power to select or how bright to adjust the dot (or reticle). It's one of those point-and-shoot affairs for the simple-minded.

    After experimenting over the years with a variety of RDS and LPVOs, it's the first time ever that I no longer have any desire to further experiment with optics for this rifle. But then again maybe that's simply because I spend all my money on flashlights now.


    YAHTZEE!

    @Leupold has discontinued all 4x & all but one 6x scopes! I'm about to buy several of the still-extant 2.5x Leupys because 90 percent of mammals I've killed in my 60 years could've been felled with one of those.

    Got two M8 4X on rifles that would work in the 'Pockylypse for everything.
    "Backstabbers and window-lickers rise to the top of human organizations like oxygen-rich turds in a champagne fountain. I suspect it's been that way since at least the Bronze Age." _ Me. 2016

  5. #95
    Supporting Business NH Shooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    New Hampshire, U.S.A.
    Quote Originally Posted by coldcase1984 View Post
    I'm about to buy several of the still-extant 2.5x Leupys because 90 percent of mammals I've killed in my 60 years could've been felled with one of those.
    The FX-II Ultralight 2.5x20mm doesn't even live on the same planet as Tactical Timmy, but for old eyes it's a Godsend: clear, bright glass, plenty of eye relief and a forgiving-enough eye box. At 12 ounces with the DD mount it doesn't turn a "lightweight carbine" into a top-heavy pig either.

    A simple, non-illuminated duplex reticle. Fixed power (about 2.2x actual). No fancy turrets. Fixed parallax (150 yards). After trying many Tactical Timmy scopes, its the first one I'm truly pleased with for my general purpose, 7.5 pound carbine (I've since added a set of MI offset BUIS which added a few ounces).

    Just shoulder the rifle and shoot - no adjustments to dick around with. I'm such a simpleton.

  6. #96
    Site Supporter rob_s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SE FL
    I still keep coming back to the question: other than 2020 Millennial hipster gunfag brag-on-internut contrarianism, why *not* have a basic set of irons on the gun?

  7. #97
    I can answer that. I don't do internet bragging, don't instagram, or any of that. I am technically a millennial, but I have a professional career, house, kids, etc.

    My AR is a Sionics LW 16" and I want it as light and handy as possible as it's more of a general purpose/ranch rifle that can be used to defend our home if necessary. I'm trading my current Vortex Viper 1-6 out for a Trijicon Accupower 1-4 to save 6.5oz. I use Warne X-Skel mounts because they're very lightweight but more robust than the Aeros. I use the built-in QD sling mount on the Sionics rail so I don't have to add another QD socket.

    Essentially it gives me as light of a carbine as reasonably possible, and since I'm not using a QD optic mount I don't really see the necessity of BUIS, which allows me to save that weight as well.

    I'm taking it hog hunting tonight and will do 100% of any shooting standing off hand. Light weight is paramount for me.

  8. #98
    The Leupold site has the FX-II Ultralight 2.5x20mm listed under 'Scopes / Rimfire Scope / FX-II Ultralight 2.5x20mm'. Is the 'rimfire' part of that a bad omen for using it on a centerfire, especially e.g. a light, hard recoiling one?

  9. #99
    Supporting Business NH Shooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    New Hampshire, U.S.A.
    Quote Originally Posted by whomever View Post
    The Leupold site has the FX-II Ultralight 2.5x20mm listed under 'Scopes / Rimfire Scope / FX-II Ultralight 2.5x20mm'. Is the 'rimfire' part of that a bad omen for using it on a centerfire, especially e.g. a light, hard recoiling one?
    Actually, the scope is designed for dangerous game rifles (think 458 Win Mag). It is renown for its durability in that realm.

    Take a look at the reviews on the Leupold page linked above.

    More links;

    https://www.chuckhawks.com/leupold_u...ght_2-5x20.htm

    https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...pics/2274971/1

  10. #100
    NH Shooter: many thanks - your links sure make it seem like it would be fine.

    (I had looked at the Leupold revues - I'm not sure they pertain to the scope at hand. For example here are some snippets from the revues at the bottom of the 2.5 page:

    " It had a badly canted reticle and the scope has very bad tunneling below 8 power."
    "No problem with the 40mm in low light. Absolutely love cds."
    "So I exchanged that scope for the VX3 4.5-14x40"

    Some of the revues mention this particular scope, but some others seem like Leupold just jumbles the revues from many models together or something, so it's hard to be sure)

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •