I'm looking at these two affordable options and I was interested in some opinions.  Let me know what you think.  The sparc review seems pretty good.  I can't find too much about the lucid, but I like some of the features.

I got my Lucid in the mail today. Haven't had a chance to test it yet, but I plan on doing that this Saturday.

This thing is remarkably solid. The finish looks great and the mount is tight. The reticles are crisp and the auto-brightness adjust is super cool.
The screw-in magnifier is cool too.

I'm very, very impressed (but then again I've never gotten to play with an ACOG, aimpoint, or Eotech before).

That "lucid" is 13 ounces? SPARC has to be way lighter than that.

ooh, the "S.E.A.L. operators" and "S.W.A.T. teams" had input on the design.

SPARC is $200. If you are very patient and look hard, you can find beat up Aimpoint M2s for around $250. Believe me, you buy a budget optic and you will always be second guessing yourself and wishing you had the best.

Hmm, I bought a Vortex StrikeFire and have never once wished I would have got an Aimpoint instead.  I am 100% satisfied with my purchase and have not regretted it for a second.  Nor, have I even given the smallest of thoughts about changing it out for something else.

But eh... maybe I am in the only one that feels this way.

I seem to recall that one of the larger metropolitan police departments has authorized the StrikeFire for its officers.  I want to say it was Chicago PD.  

People are naturally skeptical of offshore optics for good reason.  That doesn't mean that Vortex isn't selling some decent stuff.  With all things, time and testing will be the ultimate yardstick.  

well thanks for the input.  I decided to go with the vortex.  I look forward to testing it out and letting you guys know what I think.

A police department issuing an optic or firearm isn't a good indication of its durability or performance. S.W.A.T., maybe (and that's a BIG maybe). Both of the aforementioned only need their weapons and optics to work when on-call and rarely do they need them at a moment's notice. If something fails, they simply grab another off the rack. I'd say the average firearms enthusiast probably has more rounds downrange than the average police officer. Police departments buy whatever makes do from whoever offers the cheapest price. That doesn't really speak much of quality going into the decision-making process.

The military is an entirely different matter, as they rely on their equipment for months at a time and trust their lives to it and it's been proven that the Vortex products do not hold up under this sort of usage. That said, that's all I need to know to stay away from them.

Do you have an example of this?

The obvious answer would be, "Well what does common sense say?" It's obviously a clone of the Aimpoint Micros and therefore should be avoided, as it was copied and reproduced overseas (compared to building a quality unit based on research from the ground up).

That aside, yes, I do have an example:

" I did have one AR user note that when fired, the dot dimmed. After it rode the .50, I ran a mag through it and it went off.  " The battery only lasted half a week as well - not something I would want in a reliable RDS. The same goes for the Strikefire. 87GN on this forum did a great write-up on it.

Link

Some might counter and say "Bu- but that was only ONE guy who noticed it dimming out of everyone who used his optic!" So? It still happened. I guarantee you that issue would be non-existent with an Aimpoint. And this is just the first time it was used. How much worse might it get down the road? It's simple: Buy quality, get quality.

Grab another one off the rack?  Which department do you work for?

Has this thread gone off-topic, or is it just me?  

I wasn't making a direct reference - I'm speaking in regards to practicality. Let's say, for sake of argument, that the PD in question does indeed purchase said Vortex optics. If one dies, they can simply send it off for repair (free of charge) and either make due with iron sights, or use another weapon that they might have on hand, or whatever other fix might be available. They aren't in combat 24/7, nor are they in the routine business of killing people (that's not to say that they don't, but that's not their primary objective). They don't have to rely on their equipment for prolonged periods of time and if their equipment does fail, they have more lateral versatility as to how and when it gets replaced/repaired/etc. They also aren't in 48-hour-long shootouts, nor are they required to put X amount of fire downrange. Their weapons simply serve to function long enough to defend themselves and call for backup.

The same can NOT be said of the military - they're stuck with what they have and they're on call 24/7, whether they have a working equipment or not, and they're expected to perform at 100%, regardless and, if they can't, they can and DO get killed. And this reliability is required while jumping out of helicopters, crawling through mud, absorbing shock waves from mortar fire, etc. This is a stark contrast to police work. Please understand I'm now downplaying police offers or saying they do not put their lives on the line because they do; it's just not the same.

Because of this, the requirements for what's good enough for Police Department use and military use are two completely different measures and they should not be treated as equal indicators of quality or reliability.

OH man, the argument of whether the PD or Military needs stuff to work first time every time is kinda weak. I'd counter that a soldier that handles and maintains their weapon has more of a feel for what is going on with their weapon and how it is performing than an officer that has his rifle riding around in the trunk of their car just in case for prolonged periods of time. I won't argue the buy quality get quality argument, but every manufacturer started somewhere and buying a beat up used sight is a risky as taking a ride on Pamela Anderson. Sure it might work, but you know there MIGHT be consequences.

This happened to me as well. What it was in my case is the battery cover wasn't tight. I tightened it up, and it's been 100% since.

From  PreachermanMATT's Review:


You kind of left that bold part out... ever left your cellphone out in the car when it's below freezing cold?  Anybody ever seen a review of an Aimpoint (or maybe Aimpooint and Vortex) side by side go through the same torture tests with the same batteries

...ok, I'll stop hijacking the thread now.
Sorry guys.

No, I didn't "leave it out." There was no reason to include it because freezing a battery doesn't ruin the battery - it simply amplifies the drain issue.

I GUARANTEE you that a frozen Aimpoint would still operate at near full capacity. Why? Because freezing a battery slows down the transfer of electrons within the battery. An Aimpoint's drain is MAGNITUDES lower than a Sparc (considering a T1 will last 5+ years in the ON position with 1 battery). Freezing it might halve the battery life for both optics, but so what? While your SPARC might only last 12 hours more, the Aimpoint will still last 2+ years or more. I'll stand by my original statement. Buy quality, get quality. Buy a clone, get a chicom ripped off version that's inferior.

Wow, Aimpoint fanboys screaming how everything else sucks and then leaving out pertinant details to the evidance they provide. Wierd, this isn't even an Eotech thread!

I agree, that seems kind of hefty...although the mount is integrated...

You can GUARANTEE me huh ? Sorry bub, I was with a friend when his failed after the first magazine . Did they fix it? sure ? Sure. But  Guarantee !
This is not an issue with Aimoint very often , Less than any other. I personally think the Aimpoint is the best out there. But they are not infallible.
That was not the first AP I've seen go tits up.  If the OP can swing an AP then he can get the best. But if he cant the Vortex will probably serve him well.

Just because a lower priced sight looks like an Aimpoint don't assume it's a copy.  Styling and external envelope is one thing, engineering is something completely different.   I do agree you'll never be unhappy when you buy quality, but not all applications need first-line gear.

You're bouncing all over the board here. You seem to be implying that his Aimpoint broke - if it broke, then battery life after freezing has NOTHING to do with this conversation, nor does flickering. Broken is broken and even Aimpoints break (though substantially less than any other comparable optic). We're talking about battery life and the optic's battery in question died the next day after being frozen. Sure, an Aimpoint's battery might lose X amount of life, but it will STILL last exponentially longer than a Vortex. That was the original statement and it still is.

Again, put the Vortex next to an Aimpoint and in 999 out of 1,000 tests, the Vortex will die first, GUARANTEED (yes, I said it).

The problem with this thread, and many others like it. Are the OP did not mention Aimpoint/ Eotech/ Burris or anything else. He simply asked about  Vortex and another brand.
Pretty much everyone knows that AP's are the top of the heap. As happens with most of these threads is everyone,  has an opinion that doesnt even come close to what the OP asked about.
So for that matter an Aimpoint has nothing to do with the OP's post at all.

And I am unfortunately as guilty as eveyone else.

Please try reading the entire thread again - the people who brought up Aimpoints were the Vortex fanboys. Aimpoints weren't even being discussed until some pro-Vortex poster said something on the order of "well I'd like to see an Aimpoint undergo this test next to a Vortex."

Aimpoints were mentioned in the 2nd post and we all were told to buy one by the 4th post...

well said.

I just go an HD7 and went firing this weekend.

I am a weekend warrior and by no means a crack shot.  

That said the HD7 is all right.  It by no means is an AP or ACOG.  I am disappointed with the 1x view because the reticule is blurry at all four selections.  With the 2x magnifier attached it clears it up great and it is very nice but the field of view is very small and the eye relief seems very small.

I am going to call the guy up and ask about the reticule being fuzzy, I hope mine is just defective but if this is normal then I will be looking into getting something different.

if someone would put a damn 4x illuminated mill dot or at least a bdc to 600 in something like that they would sell like hot cakes hell i would buy two if they would function properly ! honestly how hard could it be

Got mine NIB from a member here last week.  Shot off 200 rounds with it on yesterday, and I had no problems with the reticles... very clear.  It seems to built really tough, I like the rubberized shell, and surprisingly the auto-brightness feature works extremely well.  It will instantaneously bright or dim the reticles when you move from shade to sun.  Having said that though, I found I had to switch to manual when I was in a dimly lit room indoors looking out a bright window.  Didn't have a chance to replicate this at the range though.  Tightened the screws before shooting, marked them, and they stayed tight.  Very impressive... so far...  for a $200 optic.

Here is a good review... Lucid HD7

I cant speak for the lucid sight , but I can say the strike fire is a valid reliable red dot sight . I have used mine for the better part of a year target shooting and hunting and am still on the same battery . its not really a big deal to turn the sight off when leaving the range or woods .

I have been selling the Lucids for a month now.  People are generaly skeptical about something new to the market as most of us are.  I tested one out of the first batch I recieved and have found it to be a good piece of hardware.  I have not banged it up against a wall or anything yet, but after a few hundred rounds, it has stayed solid, and on target.  I am not a billboard shopper like some can be, and like to look into these new companies.  I will continue to work with the lucid, giving it more of  drop test and cold weather this winter.  But I can say I would at this point feel safe with it on my weapon.

How much of a concern are the  raised adjustment turrets on the Lucid?   How much abuse will they stand up to?

I just received my Vortex SPARC and am very pleased so far. It's dot is bright and clear and the mount seems rock solid. I think the manual said it's a little over 5oz which compaired to other red dot sites I have used, doesn't feel like it's even there. Like my other Vortex optics this unit exceeds my expectations. I have never seen a Lucid but after a few mags of use so far this thing is tight. Is that even two cents worth? Maybe not

I stumbled onto a review of the Lucid and knew two things would happen: I would find other comparisons to affordable optics, and two, someone would say that only issue optics are worth the money.

My experience as the S4 of a Reserve Battalion is this: after a subordinate company returned from their mission as a light equipment repair facility in Desert Storm 1, they brought back 24 full conexes of exchanged equipment that was on their property book in excess of TOE. That is all the stuff that got a upfront exchange to the client units who needed working stuff now, not weeks later when it might be repaired. That state of the art, military spec equipment built and paid for to equip our soldiers with the best money could buy was basically malfunctioning crap.

Everyone in the service knows this: if it can be built and issued, a soldier can break it. If he can't misuse it, he can abuse it, and if it still won't break, he can just beat on it until it does. Anybody who says different hasn't been there and doesn't know what they are talking about.

I don't know of any vendor who offers a 100% exchange for new guarantee to the U.S. Army. Stuff breaks. Ask the people who use them, ask those who exchange them, Aimpoints break and that is a fact.

As a Gen 1 Aimpoint owner, I'm glad to see something affordable and new on the market, Vortex or Lucid. Apparently, perspective is lacking in this comparison. The first generation of Aimpoints was no piece of wonder gear. It was huge, took up an entire scope rail, weighed nearly a pound, ran on N batteries that are still difficult to find in a Metro area with specialty battery retailers. The thing has a 8 - eight - hour battery life. The adjustable intensity is manual only, and in practice, you kept it off with your hand on the dial at the ready. After two years of use, I bought a recoil buffer kit from Aimpoint because .30 cal rifles were too hard on it and was strongly recommended.

In other words, even as the only red dot on the market, it was close to being a piece of crap. I put it on another unknown piece of crap cheap import gun with no gas piston action and junk plastic furniture that cost less than a nice Remington 700. It was called a Heckler and Koch model 91, paid $160 for it. Together they made one heck of a deer rifle. If I could see it, I could hit it - etc.

Don't get wrapped around the axle with how great mil issue gear is - remember, M4's come with chrome button rifled barrels, which is a cheap method of doing it, and the 2MOA milspec guarantee is proof.

So far, nobody is saying "you can stake your life on a Vortex/Lucid!" It's a intermediate priced scope, country of origin is right out there, and it seems to work ok. It's exactly what the market wants, and there will probably be a lot of sales - not that it will affect the contract players. They have their game, and it's not really the public with it's demanding standards, constant browbeating on price, or stressful customer service. It's just a few government inspectors, who are a lot easier to get along with. A gravy deal when you see it, compared to the cut and thrust of retail.

It's still a bit soon to say whether either will get my money, but I sure don't have to wait 20 years to figure out both are way better than the first Aimpoints on the market by a huge margin. I wish guns were as reliable - NEVER have a FTF or malfunction, 50,000 round life, and selectable fire rate in four calibers.

If you own one, post up and tell us all about it.

Vortex vs Lucid: Does a ring mount vs unitized put up with abuse as well? More screws, more parts, less robust, and the ring itself has to resist allowing the scope to rotate if banged hard enough. I note the military uses a lot of unitized mounts - they get things designed to fit and operate on their gear the right way the first time. Rings are a marketing solution from the great scope days of the '50s, to make sure they can fit hundreds of different firearms.

Lens covers - Not so much. Nice to have, I finally took mine off because they weren't really needed. Glass screw-ons protect as well, are replaceable, and do the job, plus you can see through them and not forget they are on. It's hard to shoot with a lens cap on, we've all done it.

Doublers/magnifiers - the decision there is what ranges you will be shooting at. Field use does tend to push things to both extremes. In the case of the intermediate calibers, long shots aren't the norm, especially hunting. A small red dot alone will do past 300m. In most woodland situations, good luck seeing that far. Open field, very possible, in which case being there is the point. Versatility is nice.

Weight - I still hunt and walk a lot, the point of moving into the AR for hunting is to reduce weight. If it's an issue, use a pencil barrel and build a lightweight. More importantly, cut down on the rest of what is carried. Whether the optic weighs 8 or 13oz is a five ounce difference - most hunters with a ten shot magazine are still carrying less compared to a full mag. Make choices based on what you really do, not a fantasy combat situation.

To me, the Lucid looks the better deal.