optic or red dot?

JTF#

JTF#

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 99.5%
219   1   0
Location
Ontario
i'm still not sure what to go with. an optic or a red dot?
the optic is more accurate and gives a clear picture up to and over 100 yards. but at close range its to hard to pick up targets fast and i think the close in targets are the most important. then at the same time for the close in stuff under 50 yards you can always go shotgun or pistol and switchback.

the red dot i like but its really hard to see targets and get accurate on anything over 50yards. and why have a carbine if you cant shoot over 50 yards real well? its lighter and i would rather only use one gun.

its like time Vs. accuracy??

i have a 10.5 AR 3.5 optic(chevron) and a red dot(dot in circle).

what do you guys think? what do you guys run?
 
Why not use both...mount the scope and then the RDS either rides on top or offset.

I run separate uppers currently...scoped 20" and RDS on my 14.5...but if I was looking for a once and done setup, I'd use an offset for my red dot.
 
I struggled with your situation and ended up trying both options.
The 1x-4 optic(Nightforce) added too much weight but was accurate for longer distances. The RD (Aimpoint) also added weight but great for CQB and the 2MOA dot was ok for longer distances. However, my eyes never saw the "dot" clearly enough.
I've since been using the plain A2 irons and must say they work fine for my shooting needs…..
 
This is a completely amateur opinion, but on my REC I started with a vortex SPARC, and have since switched to a Vortex PST 1-4. It's illuminated, and I've taught myself to keep both eyes open when using it. With the illum on, in my hands (again, amateur) I can acquire a close target fast on 1x, more or less like a red dot, and dial up to 4x if I wanna reach to 100 or more. I have a throw lever for the mag ring as well...

-J.
 
True 1x 1-6 or 1-4 illuminated. For me, it's simply that my eyes don't like red dot's :(
The scope is heavier, but you can use the 1x like a red dot.

The other option which is going out of favour is the red dot with a magnifier. You'll probably never use the scope on 2x or 3x anyway.
 
A fixed 3 power with turrets or a BDC reticle will allow you to shoot in at arms length and back beyond 500m.

Nikon, Bushnell and Leupold make some economical 1 or 1.5 x 3 or 4.5 optics.
 
For 100m you should just buy an Aimpoint and a 3X magnifier if you need the extra aide to shoot 5.5" pistol bullseye.
 
I like short riles to be as handy as possible so I will usually use a red dot. On a 10.5" AR I'd go with something Aimpoint Micro or RMR-sized and keep in 100m and in. To me a heavy magnified optic offsets the main advantage of a short AR.
 
My vortex does have a clicky turret, so you could certainly reach out and tag something at distance.

I don't find it much bigger or heavier than the SPARC, esp if your gonna add a flip up magnifier. Seemed like the best all-in-one/most reliable/fewest things to go wrong, option. My REC has a 16" barrel, so I can see the point about size on a 9.5" or 10".

Is this for work or play?? I'd love to hear the opinions of operators, cause again, I'm an amateur wanna-be!!!

-J.
 
A 1-4x or 1.2-6x optic, get the best of both worlds. 1.2-6x optics have turned into my "go to" optic style for hunting (I know, not with an AR, but the use case is similar), and what I do when wandering around is leave it set bottomed out, so if a deer pops out of its day bed at close range it's easy to get a quick sight picture and snap shot. If I spot something farther away, I'll generally have plenty of time (you only need a couple seconds) to dial up the magnification to get a well placed shot out past 100 yards.
 
Depends on your application. If you want to shoot it like a varmint rifle then get magnified optics. If you want to hit minute of man a red dot will suffice.
Personally I'm concerned with hitting something at 100yds and further. Pistol accuracy is more than sufficient at closer ranges. I'm running a cheapo bushnell 1-4 circle x right now. For close in stuff I just use he circle as the aiming point.


****** disclaimer I am not an operator******
 
My eyes are getting old too. I looked at a small 1.5X ACOG in gun store. Very small and light, still ok for up close.
 
grelmar said:
A 1-4x or 1.2-6x optic, get the best of both worlds. 1.2-6x optics have turned into my "go to" optic style for hunting (I know, not with an AR, but the use case is similar), and what I do when wandering around is leave it set bottomed out, so if a deer pops out of its day bed at close range it's easy to get a quick sight picture and snap shot. If I spot something farther away, I'll generally have plenty of time (you only need a couple seconds) to dial up the magnification to get a well placed shot out past 100 yards.
Click to expand...

That is my thinking exactly..... I'm glad i'm not the only crazy one.....

-J.
 
I have tried most options. Up to 50 meters, red dot worked best for me. Past 50 a magnified optic worked best. I have used an aimpoint with a magnifier. It works.

I have also used an TA33 ACOG (3x with a generous eye box and eye relief). Surprising effective for me. Using the BAC, both eyes open was almost as effective as a red dot up to 50 (only 3/10 slower), but better and faster than a red dot or red dot and magnifier combo past 50 meters. The TA33 is also lighter, however cross eye dominance can be an issue using the BAC.

Using the ACOG/RMR combo was actually slower for me than just the ACOG. Cheek weld is the main factor and using a 45 degree offset mount didn't solve the problem.

As for 1-x variable scopes. I have tried several 1-4 scopes and even some Elcan and IOR 1/4x scopes. These were nice, but illumination wasn't daylight bright. I just recently picked up Trijicon's TR25 1-6x scope with mildot reticle and illuminated green dot centre (tritium and fiber optic illumination). I can say with certainty that Trijicon has definitely solved the daylight illumination problem I experienced with other variable scopes. It isn't daylight visible. It's bloody daylight bright. I will be doing a review and comparison with a Leupold Mk6 1-6x. The only downside that I see is that they are a bit on the heavy side. However, having a genuine mildot reticle will actually allow a shooter to get some long range work done. It is currently on my 18" DMR AR15. Oh, forgot to mention... Not cheap. But so far I can say that the TR25 has shown the most promise for my applications. I will run it through a couple of my courses and see how it stands up to hard use.
 
What happened with the smartphone aiming rover contraption you were setup with?

i.e. http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...470-My-digital-weapon-system-AR-15-2000/page4

Mister Donut said:
Looks like he edited his original post ande deleted the picture.

Basically, he had this:

IMG_0006.jpg


IMG_0008.jpg


and a camera mounted to an ROV, remote operated vehicle like an RC tank or something, and the image from the camera was fed to the screen mounted to his rifle.
Click to expand...
 
The ACOG/RMR is not a competition solution. If there is need to don a mask or do urban ops type of stuff ( not just walking to the stage and shoot), it is a pretty good solution. At 1x a vari power scope still has the eye relief baggage associated with scopes. That is another reason why an aim point with a magnifier is still a better solution than a vari power scope if fast close range shooting is the milk and butter. But if I am going to the classic infantry type of things, ie winning the firefight, approaching and jumping into the trench to mop it up, ACOG with the RMR is a great solution. There is no additional mental task to twist a ring, flip a lever or other things. I don't have to worry consistent cheek wield to use the weapon effectively at close range.

Scopes generally need consistent cheek wield because of eye relief and parallax, but they do work better if magnification is needed. I have used the MK6 as both a PR and SR optic out to 800m with the CMR reticle. It works pretty well as a SR./DMR optic out to 500m with the BDC. As a PR optic 0.2 mRAD ( 4/5 of MOA) is too coarse for my liking over 600m as each click exceeds 1/4 size of a 18" target. I guess they pick 0.2 mRAD so the the turret can go from 200m to 900m in one turn. For all intensive purposes, the Mk6 is a pretty good 0-800m solution on either a 556 or 762 semi auto. It really shines between 300 and 600m. If I have to shoot 800m and beyond regularly, I want to bump up to 8x solution, and with 0.1 mRAD or 1/4 MOA . The 1200m marking on the mk6 is only useful for MG.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom