So many good points in this thread :)

My experience... Navy... we had M14's on my first boat (submarine)  & M16A1's on my second boat... "qualified" by shooting a mag at a 3x5 card once a year and in between they mostly stayed locked in the small arms locker, usually issued an M1911A1 for security drills.   Bought & set up my first my first carbine in the previous decade, heavily influenced by this rather lengthy thread http://forums.officer.com/t81462/, which is oriented towards LE patrol carbines.  That thread started in 2008 and is on its 96th page now, and somewhere in there I picked up the reco for the Meopta K-dot 1-4x and went with that.

Then I took it to a carbine class at TDI, in southern OH.  Similar terrain to where I live - hilly, wooded.  The longest distance we shot was 300 yards.  Started prone supported, then progressed to prone unsupported, then other positions - all mostly at 100 yards then 200 then 300, then some work walking around and shooting at unknown distances from positions randomly called by the staff.  The latter taught me to appreciate light weight, or more accurately to regret lack thereof.  Then we progressed to shoot house work, with scenarios based on inside your own house with a mix of BG and no-shoot targets.  Most students had AR carbines with RDS, some with separate magnifiers but most w/o.  One guy each had an 18" barrel M1A and a Mini-14, and those sucked royally in the shoot house.  Even in supported prone, my magnification didn't seem to confer any advantage over the guys with RDS and no magnifier.  From unsupported positions, I shot tighter groups on 1X than 4x.  Of course, it was 1X in the shoothouse.

Again, I'm a non-LEO civilian so highly unlikely to ever have legal justification to shoot anybody beyond CQB distances.  So, for me, the 1-4X was a pound of extra weight for magnification I mostly didn't need, and now my home defense carbine wears an Aimpoint Micro.  Of course I have other rifles/carbines, because I'm as addicted as the next guy, and those have various optics based on what I use them for, but that isn't "real combat".  For me, personally, the only "real combat" I'm likely to see is if the Manson Family reunion is at my place.  I have shot smaller-than-mansized targets at 400 yards, but with a 2.5-10X scope on an AR with a 20" match barrel (prone from a bipod), and that's not "real combat".

My own astigmatism makes the "dot" in an RDS look more like a comet, but I find that if I ignore the comet's tail I get consistent results, so that works for me personally.  For somebody with even worse eyes than me, maybe not.

I do have ACOG's on a couple of AR's (not my home defense carbine) and like them, and I can see how that might be a better solution than an RDS for the military, or at least the infantry (probably not the best inside a submarine, which makes the inside of my house look like "Big Sky Country").  I still have that Meopta 1-4x, but haven't really figured out what to do with it.  So I guess I'd have to call it a solution in search of a problem, within the limits of my own particular set of needs.  YMMV

One of the best and worst things about the internet is that anyone can voice an opinion.  I stopped responding to the tards a long time ago, they're not worth the effort or time.

If your objective is a purely defensive civilian carbine - a 1x red dot will do what you need with less weight, cost and are tough

If you want to:
- punch paper / target shoot
- compete (2 gun / 3 gun)
- hunt
- have fading eye sight / astigmatism

... And still want the benefits of a red dot - a low power variable may work for you. The penalty is weight, cost and some toughness compared to an Aimpoint.

I suspect that some people buy LPVs for a pure defensive carbine and eventually realize there are better tools for that specific role.

Excellent video production quality, I subbed to your channel. When you say "straw lick" are you referring to Strelok?

Yes, I use Strelok Pro, to be exact, as it has a ton more reticle options.

Ok maybe it's just me, but if you are trying to get hits on a target at 400 yards in "real combat" won't you be using whatever you are issued? Or did I miss the start of Red Dawn?

I have a 1.5-5x so I can hunt with it or use it for home defense.

That rhetoric makes no sense to me at all

There are plenty of RDS out there that are only a little bit cheaper than some of those high-end optics.

Plus, like others have said here some of us have pretty bad astigmatism's and aging eyes so an LPV that's pretty lightweight is the ticket.

Super will no better than most of us, but it seems to me and my observations of his videos that he is pretty quick up close with everything he uses whether it be a RDS or LPV.

Like the other poster stated most of us will never see "real combat".

Most gun owners that I have seen on the Internet or in person who have never been in any kind of war all seem to have one same thing in common. They all have this wet dream of some kind of zombie apocalypse or some big revolution.

The whole irony of it all is that most of us will never be ready for anything like that, and probably have no idea of how bad it is going to suck if it does happen.

A good friend of mine that i met because of his interest in firearms 5 years ago has this wet dream of some big revolution coming, and he predicts it happening every year ever since I have known him getting into firearms.

The whole irony of that is that the only thing I've ever seen him do is to shoot from a bench, but he thinks he is "ready" for anything now.

It makes me kind of sad for him because sometimes I really believe that the only reason he got into firearms is because he thinks bad things are going to happen. It's a crying shame because it is also something you should really have a passion for and enjoy at the same time. Not that there's nothing wrong with being ready to possibly defend yourself someday with one, but some dudes just take themselves way too fucking serious in this business.

I can almost guarantee that the dude that posted in supers video is pretty much like any other Internet commando.

But I digress...........

I also like to have something in the 10x variable to work up my loads.

For me just shooting one kind of optic all the time can get kind of boring and stagnant. This is why I like trying all different kinds of optics not  because I feel I may be in "real combat" one day.

I'm not an Internet commando but I did stay at a Holiday Inn once.

Some units allow their soldiers to use personally purchased optics (we have had a few do that). If not, only a handful get an ACOG the rest are Aimpoints (various models)

The comfort of brain and eyes seeing a normal image at 1x.

A lpv is funky in the brush when the scope is magnifying some things up close then bending things further out.  One can try to ignore it, but the fact that one has to adjust to it shows it is not perfect.

I see what the OP did there. Trying to get more viewers for his video .

Worked on me, and I thought it was a good video. I like how he hit different price points and mentioned what you get when you go up in price.

ETA: what camera setup did you use for the through the scope footage?

I can see his point but I do like having options.  My primary optic is a micro red dot.  But I do have a 1-4 in the bin and a FTS magnifier for the red that I only run on there for competition.  The vast majority of gun owners in the country are not out running competitions, or taking training courses or even plinking more than a few times a year.  So the OP's article has a point.  The vast majority of shooters would be just fine with a regular ol red dot.  Hell where I live if you are shooting more than 100 yards it's probably on a shooting range.  The woods and hills are just too close to get much over 75 or so yards a majority of the time.

Ok, I didn't know that.

I think the critic of the video is probably a mall ninja that plays video combat games and air soft.

There are too many fallacies in the critic's post to even begin.  But ultimately he fails to understand or appreciate that the consumer, especially those of us who do not use our rifles for "combat", buy optics for many reasons, only one of which might be something remotely resembling whatever he means by "combat."

I have a 32 slot gun safe full of long guns and a few more that won't fit in the safe.  Most of them wear some type of optic, either red dot or some type of magnified optic. The rifles, shotguns (yes some shotguns have optics, too), and pistols all serve particular purposes.  They may range from close up, home defense scenarios to casual plinking, to various forms of competitive shooting, to long range precision shooting, to many different forms of hunting.   There is an optic for each purpose.

Not too far from the 1-6x24 scopes as an all-purpose scope is also the tried and true 2-7x.  I understand what the video is saying about optical quality and tracking.  My best 2-7x is a 36mm objective Kahles Helia CL.  The clarity of the glass is stunning.  Simply breath taking.  No doubt the sister company  Kahles and Swarvoski 1-6x scopes are equally stunning.

One thing I found sort of lacking in the various posts in this thread so far, is that despite the popularity of 3G, for those of us who use our rifles for other purposes, is the absence of comment about the use of field glasses - binoculars.  As one who does a lot of hunting.  I use binoculars 99% of the time in the field for spotting game, for target identification, for determining if the shot is safe (nothing behind the target) and then use the scope for the shot.  Of course sometimes things happen fast in the field and there is no tine for the field glass, but that is, frankly, rare.

When time permits binoculars have a huge advantage in larger field of view and usually better low light performance, if you are using an optic at dawn or dusk.  Putting serious money in one good pair of binoculars lets you be a little less critical about glass quality in the optic on the rifle, provided it has good low light performance.

I loved the video and thank OP for doing this.  It does seem oriented torward 3G or similar type competitive shooting, and the rules that limit optic choices.  

My personal preference would throw someone up into the open division.  But, for those of us who want practical optics, consider a combination - a mid powered scope such as the lightweight Leupold VX-R Patrol 3-9x40mm AND an offset 45 degree mini reflex dot, in my case the motion-activated Leupold DeltaPoint Pro.  

As I think someone above pointed out the VX-R Firedot is full sunlight bright.   A combo like that gives you the best of both worlds.  In the time it takes to rotate the magnification ring from 1x to 6x or back, you can simply twist your wrist 45 degrees and keep shooting.   Such combinations often weigh less than most of the mounted 1-6x scopes in that test, and you have higher magnification than 6x for those longer shots, and usually have a MRAD or MOA turrets and matching reticle.

Thanks, OP. Great video.   The critic is an idiot.

Not a factor if you buy a good one.  

My thoughts?   I get know it all comments from keyboard commandos all the time on my videos.  I very rarely will bother responding to them unless they are giving out some really bad info/advice, just not worth the time and aggravation.   Only time I will get into it with a "commentor" is if they leave a disparaging comment about one of my kids who are in some of my videos.

We don't "need" these 1-6X scopes?

Who are you to decide what I "need" or want?

Go fuck off.

Could you move that scope just a little to the right at the same position and take a photo?  And can you identify the scope?  My guess is that up close the door frame and molding at the wall edge will not be a straight line above, inside the scope and below it.  As the distance gets closer most 1x scopes cannot attain true 1x at close range and those that get close tend to have a lot of fish eye.

I'm not arguing against good 1-6x scopes.  I am saying that one must be careful in taking the argument too far.  The only ones I've seen that get reasonably close at very short distances without fisheye tend to be extremely expensive, as in Kahles and Swarvoski.  That appears to be a VX-6.  It has pretty good glass.  I might learn something here at it's price point.

I really wish we had a like button here

I love my scopes.  That guy is talking out his ass.  I really enjoy your videos.  They are the most professional firearm videos on YouTube in my opinion.  

I own all of the scopes in this video except for the Strike Eagle.  I agree with you.  I like my Swarovski Z6i best even over my Kahles.

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter and or blog, good sir.

It's a Steiner T5Xi.  If you lay the ocular lens on a ruler you can see magnification.  But not at any distance beyond 3 yards.  No fish eye, which I understand to be a ring of out of focus blur around the outside of cheaper scopes.  It is almost on par with my Razor HD.


Confirmed zero out to 500 tonight with both my 3-gun rifle and my suppressed rifle.






I want to see someone come hit those plates with an Aimpoint.  

That looks just like the steiner that I will be returning because it makes me seasick scanning in the brush.  It is excellent at 1x for what it is, but leave the diopter at one setting and see if your eyes like it at any power and any range(mine didn't).(ETA I was referring to the cheaper p4xi)  For me a reddot is easier to process when you are moving and the target is moving in a cluttered environment.  This is the third time I've tried to convert to a lpv and it just doesn't do it for me.  I'm with all of the reasons for magnification, which is why I keep trying them.

Call Travis Haley, he did 750m with a micro series (start about 7:00):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgKjbySsAik


*NOT saying I could, I would probably need some magnification*

Yeah.  I've seen that video.  He's a machine.    Although that was a full size IPSC which is easier for the naked eye to resolve at distance.  I suspect he had to walk his rounds in and found a point in the background to aim at.

Easier to do in the desert than in the a green setting with a lot of vegetation.  Not to take anything away from the dude.  I don't want to get into a gunfight with him.  

I wager that he would have a much easier time making those hits with the scope that was on his rifle in Najaf.

I'm sure he could, just as I'm sure I couldn't.  Some people can shoot amazing distances with irons, but my eyes can't.  Different strokes, etc.

How well a scope works at 1x depends on what scope you have.  An inexpensive one, or one without a bright dot, would be more difficult to use in clutter; get a good one with a bright dot and it's quite different.  I used a Swarovski 1-6x recently in a 3 gun match to take out steel targets between 20 to 50 yards, in brush.  And the targets weren't particularly large.  The 1-6x worked great at 1x with the dot turned up to max.  When I got to the long range stage I just upped the magnification.

OTOH, red dots are definitely faster to use up close.  No doubt about it.  I would never shoot Steel Challenge with a variable scope, it't just a bit slower.   Of course, the targets are fairly large, in the open, and not too far away.  And my eyes don't see a dot anymore, more like a cluster of grapes.  For large targets I don't care; for more precise hits it's a real issue.

For personal defense, in the house, a red dot is probably optimum.  Once you go outside with any distance, where you have to identify your target, or the target is partially hidden, it gets more interesting.  If you can do it with your eyes, go for it.  I can't, and would need some kind of diopter adjustment and/or magnification.

I'm guessing for weight savings and the fact that they probably never shoot past 100 yards.

Hitting with an RDS out to 400 is easy. Even easier with a 1-4X or 1-6X and with the bonus feature of more conclusive PID and accuracy of shot placement.

My "do-all" AR has a TR24 and imho I can do just about everything that I'd ever realistically need to do with a 16" AR.

It is probably weight savings, but you don't have to choose between them. It's not mutually exclusive.  Use QD mounts and swap out.  Run the red dot for HD and a scope when out in the field.

Or, if you choose the scope wisely and select a light one, you can actually run both, with the red dot offset 45 degrees.  Some combinations of mounted scopes and red dots, especially small mini-reflex dots with ligher scopes such as many Leupold models, actually weigh less than other mounted scopes alone, and the mini-reflex sights are usually under two ounces.

just to much bravdo and internet commando there pal. easy? really? i just have to call BS on that comment.

i shoot out to 400 with a scoped rifle from prone routinely and in the same location i shoot with RDS's.  i have to say its not an easy shot without magnification.

i'd bet you couldnt make a first round hit on a man sized target with your 1x whatever.

on top of all that, your TR24 triangle reticle would totally obscure a man size target at 400. thats about the last scope i'd want for shooting at that distance and i know, i've owned one.

There are videos of guys hitting very far out with red dots. I'm talking 600, 750 yards. Practice is all it takes.

And great eyes lol.

And freshly spray painted white targets, in front of a contrasting background.

Put a brown IPSC target out in the middle of a mowed grass field, and I would be amazed if you could even find it looking through a red dot.


It takes a very special set of circumstances to make hits on targets at that kind of range with an unmagnified red dot.  Those circumstances aren't what most of us would call practical.

"Possible" and "easy" are two very, very different things.

Succinct and true.



 

This will definitely further the conversation

I'd like to see him shoot in low light with that scope at 8x and only a 24mm objective.  3mm exit pupil and image that is dim due to the small exit pupil will make things much more difficult.   As a pro, he can probably do ok, but it is far from optimum for low light.

These scopes are for good light, IMHO.  Eventually they will realize that at 8x you need a 32mm or 36mm objective.

Don't get me wrong.  Scopes are a great idea and I believe in them.  Strongly.  I just am not thrilled about the current 1-8x scopes that still stay with 24mm objectives.

1-4x and 1-6x optics are awesome for most situations and any professional knows PID is extremely important, also they are good to use for scanning, but I ran into a situation that really sucked with a 1-4x optic. I was using my trusty Horus Talon clearing a house and I was coming out of a bright room and entering a dark one. The glare off of the glass made it useless. I have never had this happen with an Eotech or Aimpoint.

Question to OP and others...

OP you made this video about the Primary Arms Holosun w/ACSS reticle



With something like that and a magnifier is it competition for a 1-4? I know with my 1-4 I only use it on 1x or 4x so the magnifier seems like a good idea.

I don't own the ACSS Holosun yet but plan on buying one, and already have a 3x magnifier so we'll see how it goes for my use.



P.S. I love your videos, OP. Subbed for years and always look forward to the next one



P.P.S. When will Dynamic Pie Concepts make more vids?

Bruce kicked ass in limited division 3-gun with iron sights for many years.....  He is a phenomenal shooter.


Yet again, in that video he was shooting clearly defined targets.  1x optics only work at extended range on high contrast targets.  The guys espousing Aimpoints for 400+ yards are ignoring that fact.

I just picked up the Primary Arms SFP 1-8x scope, and don't see going past 5x or 6x as being useful except for very specific situations.  The reduced exit pupil makes the scope just too hard to use quickly and easily.

+1

Before you can hit a target, you need to be able to actually see the target.  When the targets are buried in clutter, it's not so easy.

If you already have the ACSS red dot then adding a magnifier makes it a great package and very competitive against a 1-4x. Just remember that since it's smaller, it will never be as bright as a dedicated scope. Plus, if your red dot dies, you don't have an etched reticle as a backup.

If you don't already have the ACSS then I think a 1-4x or 1-6x is the better overall optic.

PS. We're all retired so no mas, amigos. Thanks for watching. :)

First Carnik Con  and now DPC, so sad Does that also mean no more SSCA vids?

I already have a Vortex 1-4x that I like but I'm going lightweight on a current build so I think I'll go with the ACSS and keep the magnifier handy for when I need it.

Another gun down the line I have a 1-6x planned.

Never say never but I'm done as well.

Double

True.

I had a recent issue with a TRS-25 on my 10/22 at a .22 match with what was described above. The TRS-25 has a blue-green tint to it. Usually not a problem. This match had a part where we had to shoot steel out a 100 yards. Steel was painted white and was sitting at the base of a grass covered hump.

The tint of the TRS-25 made the steel match the grass and I couldn't distinguish target from grass shit. Taking my out of the optic to spot it then bringing the rifle/optic up to my eye to kinda put the dot over where I was looking helped me his 3 out of 5, but I was lobbing a 5+ rounds down for each one.

I was able to try another shooter's Trijicon MRO and could see the steel just fine through it.

With my TRS-25 at the range I can hit paper plates at 100 yards all day long, but that's against a dirt background. On grass it was impossible. I may have to re-think the TRS-25 or bring my other 10/22 the next time I shoot a .22 match just in case the targets are set up that way again.