Something new coming from Aimpoint 1/17…

[GJM]

9 moa seems more wing shooting, than slug/buck oriented.

[Wayne Dobbs]

9 moa seems more wing shooting, than slug/buck oriented.

That's correct. This optic is intended for wingshooting, sporting clays, etc.

[Default.mp3]

See, this is where I think they *do* need some hype

How is this different than the old one?

Looks to be a 3X-C but environmentally sealed up to the level of a 3XMag-1 (submersible to 80'/25m versus 2'/0.5m).

[rob_s]

That's correct. This optic is intended for wingshooting, sporting clays, etc.

anyone know the "rules" on optics in sporting clays?

I saw an interesting video of a guy shooting some clays with a laser on the gun the other day, shooting through some sort of smog/fog so the laser was visible. I doubt it was done as a shooting aid but more of an instructional aid to show POI vs POA.

I'm not pro, but I'm not exactly sure how I'd use an optic in Sporting Clays, if allowed.

[Elwin]

9 moa seems more wing shooting, than slug/buck oriented.

And for that reason alone, I'm not seeing much reason to pick this over a Micro S1.

[Super77]

Looks like there are going to be tan and grey Acros after all.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C2NYE...VhYjR0c2t2MzR4

[Tokarev]

See, this is where I think they *do* need some hype

How is this different than the old one?

This new one is rated submersible to 80 feet. The 3X-C is only rated to 2 feet.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[HeavyDuty]

So the big launch, as many already surmised, is an ACRO for shotguns.



Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

Yawn.

[HCM]

I would guess the former just based on how they have marketed the S1. Maybe I'm experiencing early onset fuddism or just don't know enough about wing shooting outside my own experience, but I see that approach as a non-starter.

I would seriously consider putting an S1 or this new ACRO version on a home defense 870, and would never, ever think of putting it on my hunting over/under. I know DB has written favorably about shooting clays with an S1 as a beginner, but people who already shoot clays/birds I see as being less open to that idea. It runs counter to how we've been taught to shoot flying things (no visual reference other than the target at all, hitting is entirely based on physical index of the gun so that it's always pointing where you're looking, etc.). And no, I don't think this is going to end up being the same as the irons vs. optics debates we've had regarding rifles and pistols, where I very much fall on the optic side. I'm open to being corrected, but I just don't see it.

Broaden your horizons:



What you described re: target focus and pointing where you’re looking is EXACTLY how you are supposed to run a red dot, whether on shotgun, pistol, or carbine.

I believe that also explains why brand new shooters who start with red dots are more successful with them. Because they are doing exactly what you describe.

Those of us who transitioned from irons have to work a lot harder to break old habits. We say we’re doing target focus etc but more often than not we are not, or are not doing it consistently.

[Caballoflaco]

More George Digweed and this video with TGS Outdoors features the new aimpoint. I’ve also noticed that high level Brit shooters are way less averse to talking about needing to reference the gun visually to shoot well than the “instinctive” Americans.