User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 1:53:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Marksman14]
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HawkinsID: I just figured it out. Most gamers are like the soccer moms that go to cardio kickboxing class and somehow think what they are doing has prepared them for a street fight. They can’t see beyond the limitations of their artificial construct. Better than being the guy that blames his equipment for his failures in his masturbatory fantasy scenarios that he passes as real life, rather than his lack of common sense, tactics, and ability to appropriately use the equipment. Not liking something and being too stupid to use it properly are two different things. No surprise LPVOs are beyond your grasp. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 1:55:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Missilegeek]
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HawkinsID: I just figured it out. Most gamers are like the soccer moms that go to cardio kickboxing class and somehow think what they are doing has prepared them for a street fight. They can’t see beyond the limitations of their artificial construct. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HawkinsID: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: Coyotes are smaller and run a lot faster than people. They are way smaller than cars. All of the shots described are very doable with an RDS or LVPO on 1X. How do you know that you didn't have another 2 seconds to dial up for the second yote? How long do you think it takes to change magnification? I just figured it out. Most gamers are like the soccer moms that go to cardio kickboxing class and somehow think what they are doing has prepared them for a street fight. They can’t see beyond the limitations of their artificial construct. You've now shit on people with significant military training, deployments, hunting and competition experience who disagree with you. What experiences do you have using an LVPO in a dynamic environment? Because if all you have to offer is a single hunting story, with questionable analysis and conclusions... Prepare to be ridiculed and ignored. As a coyote hunter... A scope is a far better optic for that task than an ACOG. And I love my ACOGs. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 1:57:36 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HawkinsID: I just figured it out. Most gamers are like the soccer moms that go to cardio kickboxing class and somehow think what they are doing has prepared them for a street fight. They can’t see beyond the limitations of their artificial construct. There is so much fail in the above comments, it is hard to know where to start. Why limit yourself to 1x when you can have magnification instantly at hand. The idea is to optimize your performance, not minimize it. Coyotes and people blend in. Good luck with your red dot in the early morning low light on a brown target. By the way, people blend in too. It’s called camo. You don’t know how much time you have in the real world before the target is gone. I’m not wasting time fiddling with a scope while I should be focusing on the threat. Bad guys in vehicles move faster than coyotes. Smart bad guys get behind cover. There is no such thing as a man size target after the shooting starts. You get a head, leg, or other small body part at best. So, the size comment is wrong too. This kind of crap is so annoying. I've been involved in competitive shooting for 25 years or so, and no one who actually shoots matches thinks this way. People who don't shoot matches think people that shoot matches think this way. Competitive shooters recognize that we are playing a game. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 2:04:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: hoody2shoez]
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: You've now shit on people with significant military training, deployments, hunting and competition experience who disagree with you. What experiences do you have using an LVPO in a dynamic environment? Because if all you have to offer is a single hunting story, with questionable analysis and conclusions... Prepare to be ridiculed and ignored. As a coyote hunter... A scope is a far better optic for that task than an ACOG. And I love my ACOGs. I can attest to that! We've had this argument before  Real talk though... I better go tell all my dudes with the 14.5 urgi's and only an atacr on it they are combat ineffective |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 2:09:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: gman556]
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By hoody2shoez: Listen, it's ok not to like something... but that is a lie. Brought to you by guys that have done this in real world applications. This is one of those times where if you don't know, then don't pretend to know. Under his other screen name (before he was banned for his usual optics thread meltdowns) a couple years ago it was rabbits instead of coyotes, and This time it's paintball and coyote's. All his post seemed very familiar and reminiscent of a baned member here a year or two ago. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 2:46:07 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MkTwain: I bought a TA11 for my AR308 and started to wonder why I had waited so many years before buying this amazing optic. you guys are saying LVPO's are superior? Which should I try? I suppose I'd have to buy a reasonably expensive version to match the glass quality of Trijicon? LPVO has some strong points over the ACOG. True 1x for close range, potential for really bright dot depending on the optic, more magnification on the top end for better target ID, and reticles that allow for more precise shots and some even for wind holds. Those are quantifiable facts that support the LPVO. That said, if the TA11 is meeting your needs and your happy with it an LPVO might not be a worthwhile investment. If you're not going to take advantage of the LPVO benefits, then the ACOG is just fine. Add an RMR and rock on. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 2:49:58 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By hoody2shoez: I can attest to that! We've had this argument before Real talk though... I better go tell all my dudes with the 14.5 urgi's and only an atacr on it they are combat ineffective Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By hoody2shoez: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: You've now shit on people with significant military training, deployments, hunting and competition experience who disagree with you. What experiences do you have using an LVPO in a dynamic environment? Because if all you have to offer is a single hunting story, with questionable analysis and conclusions... Prepare to be ridiculed and ignored. As a coyote hunter... A scope is a far better optic for that task than an ACOG. And I love my ACOGs. I can attest to that! We've had this argument before Real talk though... I better go tell all my dudes with the 14.5 urgi's and only an atacr on it they are combat ineffective Yeah well... What would they know? Do they even Coyote hunt?  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 2:54:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: gman556]
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Yeah well... What would they know? Do they even Coyote hunt? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Originally Posted By hoody2shoez: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: You've now shit on people with significant military training, deployments, hunting and competition experience who disagree with you. What experiences do you have using an LVPO in a dynamic environment? Because if all you have to offer is a single hunting story, with questionable analysis and conclusions... Prepare to be ridiculed and ignored. As a coyote hunter... A scope is a far better optic for that task than an ACOG. And I love my ACOGs. I can attest to that! We've had this argument before Real talk though... I better go tell all my dudes with the 14.5 urgi's and only an atacr on it they are combat ineffective Yeah well... What would they know? Do they even Coyote hunt? Just dawned on me that his coyote story mirrors that banned members coyote story to a T! If it wasn't for the newer policy here they started, to hide screen names in the archived threads, to protect members here which of course isn't a bad thing, I'm sure his older post before he got banned the first time could easily be brought up, because they are identical. Only difference here is he's only got a couple of threads locked this time around according to another poster, and hasn't had the full nuclear meltdown yet. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 3:08:52 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Yeah well... What would they know? Do they even Coyote hunt? Coyotes are the new near peer threat man! Get with it |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 3:10:26 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Coyotes are smaller and run a lot faster than people. They are way smaller than cars. All of the shots described are very doable with an RDS or LVPO on 1X. How do you know that you didn't have another 2 seconds to dial up for the second yote? How long do you think it takes to change magnification? Ah yes. Targets are simultaneously too easy and too difficult. Therefore irrelevant. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 3:13:30 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: You've now shit on people with significant military training, deployments, hunting and competition experience who disagree with you. What experiences do you have using an LVPO in a dynamic environment? Because if all you have to offer is a single hunting story, with questionable analysis and conclusions... Prepare to be ridiculed and ignored. As a coyote hunter... A scope is a far better optic for that task than an ACOG. And I love my ACOGs. I used the first gen Steiner Military 1-4 in Iraq in the 2010-2011 time frame. They replaced our ACOGs and worked very well. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 3:17:07 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Razzman1: This kind of crap is so annoying. I've been involved in competitive shooting for 25 years or so, and no one who actually shoots matches thinks this way. People who don't shoot matches think people that shoot matches think this way. Competitive shooters recognize that we are playing a game. Exactly. Competitive shooters recognize that’s it’s a measure of shooting skill and that’s it. Then you get .mil or LE guys who have neglected the fundamentals who come to a match, get curb stomped, throw their sucker in the dirt and never come back while muttering about how it’s not realistic instead of having the self actualization that they have hard skills to work on. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 3:39:42 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By hoody2shoez: Coyotes are the new near peer threat man! Get with it Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By hoody2shoez: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: Yeah well... What would they know? Do they even Coyote hunt? Coyotes are the new near peer threat man! Get with it It's all fun and games until you miss a Coyote at 100 yards. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 3:45:42 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 45-Seventy: Ah yes. Targets are simultaneously too easy and too difficult. Therefore irrelevant. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 45-Seventy: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: Coyotes are smaller and run a lot faster than people. They are way smaller than cars. All of the shots described are very doable with an RDS or LVPO on 1X. How do you know that you didn't have another 2 seconds to dial up for the second yote? How long do you think it takes to change magnification? Ah yes. Targets are simultaneously too easy and too difficult. Therefore irrelevant. I was making target comparisons, because the conclusions that dude suggested were not supported by the facts in his own statement. The key facts were the targets, distances and speed. I don't know what you are babbling about now. Try to keep up. This isn't a scored rifle comp. We aren't doing retard math here. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 3:54:33 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 45-Seventy: Exactly. Competitive shooters recognize that’s it’s a measure of shooting skill and that’s it. Then you get .mil or LE guys who have neglected the fundamentals who come to a match, get curb stomped, throw their sucker in the dirt and never come back while muttering about how it’s not realistic instead of having the self actualization that they have hard skills to work on. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 45-Seventy: Originally Posted By Razzman1: This kind of crap is so annoying. I've been involved in competitive shooting for 25 years or so, and no one who actually shoots matches thinks this way. People who don't shoot matches think people that shoot matches think this way. Competitive shooters recognize that we are playing a game. Exactly. Competitive shooters recognize that’s it’s a measure of shooting skill and that’s it. Then you get .mil or LE guys who have neglected the fundamentals who come to a match, get curb stomped, throw their sucker in the dirt and never come back while muttering about how it’s not realistic instead of having the self actualization that they have hard skills to work on. I'm not LE or mil. but yep but I got curb stomped my first time at a local, but instead of whining like a little **** I went home and stewed over it for a while, trained my ass off for a few weeks at the range with daily dryfire added, and the next match I moved up another five or six notches, stewed over that again training even harder and made it up to 4th place my last time out of 30. Not a big # I know but a personal improvement. Also, to be honest I pretty much knew that I was going to get curb stomped my first time because I had no delusions that I was some kind of expert even though I had been shooting for a long long time before. I knew this would be something different to the way I had been shooting and I was there to learn and add more skills, and as far as I'm concerned I'll always be learning, and training to better myself, because you should always be a student of whatever craft you are into. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 4:09:34 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Tug153: After over a decade of shooting competition l, I have learned those that are the most against it are people with low shooting skills and don't want others to see it. As much as some people want to detract from competition, it does make you a better shooter. The Army knows this. The Marines know this. Many tactical trainers know this. If people don't want to shoot competition, that's totally cool. Just don't say how "retarded" it is. It just shows a fragile ego that doesn't want to be shown how poor their shooting skills really are. Sure those guys exist. But there is a lot of hubris in the competition world. A lot of it is unfounded. From what I've seen it's more common for a "new" guy to show up and tell you how it could be better. But your fragile egos and limited experiences and training won't let anyone listen. This thread is a great example of how that goes. We described in detail how retarded the scoring and classification for rifle comp is and what that results in. "Stop telling me how to do better and more realistic training, and get better at the very limited, stupid and backwards shit that I'm used to doing." Well ok, you're the guy with tenure and the clip board. Have fun. The thing is, we all have limited time and money to shoot, hunt, reload... Whatever. Don't expect to grow or expand, if you're sport is doing some dumb shit that an average shooter and basic logic can easily poke holes in on day one. I see the value, but it could be so much better. If I had a dollar for every time I had to say "yeah I know it's retarded, but that's what they do here" to new people at IDPA, USPSA and tac rifle competitions, I could buy a half tank of gas. For every guy like you describe, there are 5 or 10 guys who show up now and then and don't take the sport serious. Because when you do retarded shit, like idiotic rules, classes and scoring, you don't merit serious attention or resources. |
|
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 4:45:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: bnc]
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Sure those guys exist. But there is a lot of hubris in the competition world. A lot of it is unfounded. From what I've seen it's more common for a "new" guy to show up and tell you how it could be better. But your fragile egos and limited experiences and training won't let anyone listen. This thread is a great example of how that goes. We described in detail how retarded the scoring and classification for rifle comp is and what that results in. "Stop telling me how to do better and more realistic training, and get better at the very limited, stupid and backwards shit that I'm used to doing." Well ok, you're the guy with tenure and the clip board. Have fun. The thing is, we all have limited time and money to shoot, hunt, reload... Whatever. Don't expect to grow or expand, if you're sport is doing some dumb shit that an average shooter and basic logic can easily poke holes in on day one. I see the value, but it could be so much better. If I had a dollar for every time I had to say "yeah I know it's retarded, but that's what they do here" to new people at IDPA, USPSA and tac rifle competitions, I could buy a half tank of gas. For every guy like you describe, there are 5 or 10 guys who show up now and then and don't take the sport serious. Because when you do retarded shit, like idiotic rules, classes and scoring, you don't merit serious attention or resources. I'll give an example. I'm a [very] amature motorcycle racer and of course watch the sport as well. It is normal to hear people lamenting how so-and-so is a better rider and should have won but the other guy has a faster bike. But the purpose of racing (take MotoGP or WSBK for example) isn't just a competition of riders, it is just as much a competition of machinery. It is also entertainment, and so the racing leagues make rules that attempt to level the field in order to keep the competition close enough to be interesting. Then there is the technology development aspect as well, and more rules that address that side of the racing world. If looking at the race purely with the purpose of determining who is the most skilled rider, then it much of it will seem illogical. There are some racing series where everyone has the same bike; those are usually a farm series for developing young riders. I'm not an expert on any system of shooting game rules since most of the matches I've done are outlaw, but the point still stands. Shooting games aren't supposed to be realistic training and therefore have rules that are intended for reasons other than simulating real life. And even if that weren't true, there is such a variety of real life that it would take many different types of simulations to capture it all. BTW: If you are interested in picking up a like-new TA33, let me know since I'll likely put mine up for sale soon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 5:02:00 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Sure those guys exist. But there is a lot of hubris in the competition world. A lot of it is unfounded. From what I've seen it's more common for a "new" guy to show up and tell you how it could be better. But your fragile egos and limited experiences and training won't let anyone listen. This thread is a great example of how that goes. We described in detail how retarded the scoring and classification for rifle comp is and what that results in. "Stop telling me how to do better and more realistic training, and get better at the very limited, stupid and backwards shit that I'm used to doing." Well ok, you're the guy with tenure and the clip board. Have fun. The thing is, we all have limited time and money to shoot, hunt, reload... Whatever. Don't expect to grow or expand, if you're sport is doing some dumb shit that an average shooter and basic logic can easily poke holes in on day one. I see the value, but it could be so much better. If I had a dollar for every time I had to say "yeah I know it's retarded, but that's what they do here" to new people at IDPA, USPSA and tac rifle competitions, I could buy a half tank of gas. For every guy like you describe, there are 5 or 10 guys who show up now and then and don't take the sport serious. Because when you do retarded shit, like idiotic rules, classes and scoring, you don't merit serious attention or resources. If you had given realistic examples of how to “improve” shooting sports, it would have been taken seriously. Don’t really know what to tell you. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 5:05:41 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bnc: But realistic training probably isn't the point in most cases. I've never gone to a shooting match thinking I preparing for a deployment with Team 6. Like others have stated, it is a game for the sake of gaming; no different than golf or some tennis at the Y. Games need rules, and many times those rules have a purpose that the players are probably unaware of. I'll give an example. I'm a [very] amature motorcycle racer and of course watch the sport as well. It is normal to hear people lamenting how so-and-so is a better rider and should have won but the other guy has a faster bike. But the purpose of racing (take MotoGP or WSBK for example) isn't just a competition of riders, it is just as much a competition of machinery. It is also entertainment, and so the racing leagues make rules that attempt to level the field in order to keep the competition close enough to be interesting. Then there is the technology development aspect as well, and more rules that address that side of the racing world. If looking at the race purely with the purpose of determining who is the most skilled rider, then it much of it will seem illogical. There are some racing series where everyone has the same bike; those are usually a farm series for developing young riders. I'm not an expert on any system of shooting game rules since most of the matches I've done are outlaw, but the point still stands. Shooting games aren't supposed to be realistic training and therefore have rules that are intended for reasons other than simulating real life. And even if that weren't true, there is such a variety of real life that it would take many different types of simulations to capture it all. BTW: If you are interested in picking up a like-new TA33, let me know since I'll likely put mine up for sale soon. Exactly this. There is so much, “coulda, woulda, shoulda” in the shooting sports. Hell, everyone does it from time to time and I used to do it, too. “If I had done this/that I could have won.” But what does every last one of those excuses boils down to? “If only I had performed better, I would have had better results.” That’s it. Performance or lack there of. So? Perform better. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 5:30:57 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bnc: But realistic training probably isn't the point in most cases. Fair enough. But you can't really say that, and then show up on the internet pretending that the gaming experience has significant relevance in training or evaluating skill sets or equipment. So to summarize, the discussion has proceeded like this: Gamer brah: "games show the superiority of the LVPO..." Normal People: "Your games are setup and scored in a manner that highlights the strengths of LVPO" GB: "Nuh uh" NP: Yeah so (3 pages of back and forth showing common flaws in stage design and scoring that favor using an LVPO) GB: You just suck, the way we do things is fine and good training. You need to just be better. NP: Well a lot of it actually isn't good training. And the evaluation is extremely flawed due to the illogical scoring. GB: Well we was just fooling around. These games aren't serious. We just spend a ton of money time and effort and make it part of our identity and jerk off to practiscore. NP: 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 5:59:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: PacNW5]
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By gman556: I'm not LE or mil. but yep but I got curb stomped my first time at a local, but instead of whining like a little **** I went home and stewed over it for a while, trained my ass off for a few weeks at the range with daily dryfire added, and the next match I moved up another five or six notches, stewed over that again training even harder and made it up to 4th place my last time out of 30. Not a big # I know but a personal improvement. Also, to be honest I pretty much knew that I was going to get curb stomped my first time because I had no delusions that I was some kind of expert even though I had been shooting for a long long time before. I knew this would be something different to the way I had been shooting and I was there to learn and add more skills, and as far as I'm concerned I'll always be learning, and training to better myself, because you should always be a student of whatever craft you are into. I think you should be commended for your hard work and more importantly, your outlook. Those with a strong internal locus of control adopt the same outlook. If a shooter is any good, they’ll tell you that they took a similar journey. When you had a suboptimal output, you took a hard look at your inputs and how you could change them to arrive a better output. In that way, what happens after the buzzer goes off is already known. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 6:00:19 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Fair enough. But you can't really say that, and then show up on the internet pretending that the gaming experience has significant relevance in training or evaluating skill sets or equipment. So to summarize, the discussion has proceeded like this: Gamer brah: "games show the superiority of the LVPO..." Normal People: "Your games are setup and scored in a manner that highlights the strengths of LVPO" GB: "Nuh uh" NP: Yeah so (3 pages of back and forth showing common flaws in stage design and scoring that favor using an LVPO) GB: You just suck, the way we do things is fine and good training. You need to just be better. NP: Well a lot of it actually isn't good training. And the evaluation is extremely flawed due to the illogical scoring. GB: Well we was just fooling around. These games aren't serious. We just spend a ton of money time and effort and make it part of our identity and jerk off to practiscore. NP: I think the only person in this thread which is equating the shooting sports with training is you. Beyond that, the point was “3-Gun represents a spectrum of parameters from contact distance to precision shots at distance. This is a good example of how flexible a LPVO is.” Your response to that was to suggest narrowing those parameters, dropping the timed aspect of scoring to reduce the penalties on poor shooters, having a variable par time system which would be exceedingly impractical if not impossible to implement at the club level, and even then state yourself that the results would probably remain unchanged between people using a prism optic or an LPVO. It seems you don’t even really know what it is you want or how to implement it in the real world. With those things in mind, I don’t really know what to tell you. |
|
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 6:08:22 PM EDT
[#23]
Something I’ve been thinking about over the weekend: outside of 3 gun competitions, is a piggy back dot on a magnified optic the pinnacle of general purpose rifle performance? And or, if you have a piggy back reddot, wouldn’t a midrange optic with better light gathering properties be better than a lpvo?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 6:18:20 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TobyLazur: Something I’ve been thinking about over the weekend: outside of 3 gun competitions, is a piggy back dot on a magnified optic the pinnacle of general purpose rifle performance? And or, if you have a piggy back reddot, wouldn’t a midrange optic with better light gathering properties be better than a lpvo? For the vast majority of what people need, a RDS probably fills the bill. Something like a TA33 with red dot is an excellent choice for a general use, do it all carbine. In terms of weight to capability it’s a great choice. If you need more flexibility or performance particularly at range, an LPVO does that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 6:29:08 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 45-Seventy: I think the only person in this thread which is equating the shooting sports with training is you. Beyond that, the point was “3-Gun represents a spectrum of parameters from contact distance to precision shots at distance. This is a good example of how flexible a LPVO is.” Your response to that was to suggest narrowing those parameters, dropping the timed aspect of scoring to reduce the penalties on poor shooters, having a variable par time system which would be exceedingly impractical if not impossible to implement at the club level, and even then state yourself that the results would probably remain unchanged between people using a prism optic or an LPVO. It seems you don’t even really know what it is you want or how to implement it in the real world. With those things in mind, I don’t really know what to tell you. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 45-Seventy: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: Fair enough. But you can't really say that, and then show up on the internet pretending that the gaming experience has significant relevance in training or evaluating skill sets or equipment. So to summarize, the discussion has proceeded like this: Gamer brah: "games show the superiority of the LVPO..." Normal People: "Your games are setup and scored in a manner that highlights the strengths of LVPO" GB: "Nuh uh" NP: Yeah so (3 pages of back and forth showing common flaws in stage design and scoring that favor using an LVPO) GB: You just suck, the way we do things is fine and good training. You need to just be better. NP: Well a lot of it actually isn't good training. And the evaluation is extremely flawed due to the illogical scoring. GB: Well we was just fooling around. These games aren't serious. We just spend a ton of money time and effort and make it part of our identity and jerk off to practiscore. NP: I think the only person in this thread which is equating the shooting sports with training is you. Beyond that, the point was “3-Gun represents a spectrum of parameters from contact distance to precision shots at distance. This is a good example of how flexible a LPVO is.” Your response to that was to suggest narrowing those parameters, dropping the timed aspect of scoring to reduce the penalties on poor shooters, having a variable par time system which would be exceedingly impractical if not impossible to implement at the club level, and even then state yourself that the results would probably remain unchanged between people using a prism optic or an LPVO. It seems you don’t even really know what it is you want or how to implement it in the real world. With those things in mind, I don’t really know what to tell you. That isn't the key thing that was claimed, and you know it. The key false statements were that competitions were a good way to compare and determine what optics are better. It was further claimed that competition scoring was a valuable metric. Subsequent discussion revealed the many and significant flaws with that approach. What's sad is that this nonsense was presented as unassailable, settled science. Anyone who questioned it was personally attacked. The same approaches used by the branch covidians. Yes we've well established that you can't keep up with nuances of the conversation and didn't follow any of the important elements. Or at leadt pretend you can't, when the facts don't support your position. Yet somehow this has no impact on your confidence to attempt to draw conclusions. It's a decent display of the hubris and immutability I mentioned earlier. Now instead of just admitting you were full of shit, we are at the gaslighting phase, where you pretend that the Comp bros didn't make a bunch of BS statements and double and triple down on them.  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 6:31:16 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TobyLazur: Something I’ve been thinking about over the weekend: outside of 3 gun competitions, is a piggy back dot on a magnified optic the pinnacle of general purpose rifle performance? And or, if you have a piggy back reddot, wouldn’t a midrange optic with better light gathering properties be better than a lpvo? I think the biggest difficulty is defining what general purpose means and how to measure it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 7:16:04 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: That isn't the key thing that was claimed, and you know it. The key false statements were that competitions were a good way to compare and determine what optics are better. It was further claimed that competition scoring was a valuable metric. Subsequent discussion revealed the many and significant flaws with that approach. What's sad is that this nonsense was presented as unassailable, settled science. Anyone who questioned it was personally attacked. The same approaches used by the branch covidians. Yes we've well established that you can't keep up with nuances of the conversation and didn't follow any of the important elements. Or at leadt pretend you can't, when the facts don't support your position. Yet somehow this has no impact on your confidence to attempt to draw conclusions. It's a decent display of the hubris and immutability I mentioned earlier. Now instead of just admitting you were full of shit, we are at the gaslighting phase, where you pretend that the Comp bros didn't make a bunch of BS statements and double and triple down on them. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.quickmeme.com%2Fimg%2F56%2F56c33be350fbade39386342c5a0d014696d019cafdd3ee660cf618274783a31e.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=4f37531b5163be1d912a6afe470f2882b74bbca764e8cb4e51ae3cb36451a2a7&ipo=images Ok |
|
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 7:34:40 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PacNW5: I think the biggest difficulty is defining what general purpose means and how to measure it. I'm going to lock my Aimpoint, Razor, and ACOG in the safe together and see which one survives the night.
|
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 8:05:28 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PacNW5: I think the biggest difficulty is defining what general purpose means and how to measure it. I suppose that’s true. In my neighborhood, I’d struggle to find a shot over 100 yards. A mile away from me, lines of sight stretch for miles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 9:04:23 PM EDT
[#30]
I want good precision and speed for the bulk of my shooting at 100yds to the occasional 300 with some 600yd capability. I'm in the prism/MRDS camp, but couldn't find any I liked in my price range. The most capable LPVOs are outside my price range and/or boat anchors.
So I ended up with the TR24G. Which is great, except Trijicon doesn't update for shit. The magnification ring is rubber and round on the front so my lever easily pops out of engagement. |
|
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 9:26:52 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HighpowerRifleBrony: I want good precision and speed for the bulk of my shooting at 100yds to the occasional 300 with some 600yd capability. I'm in the prism/MRDS camp, but couldn't find any I liked in my price range. The most capable LPVOs are outside my price range and/or boat anchors. So I ended up with the TR24G. Which is great, except Trijicon doesn't update for shit. The magnification ring is rubber and round on the front so my lever easily pops out of engagement. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/3/2024 9:38:35 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: There are ways to design and execute a stage to better replicate more depth, breadth and movement with current equipment. You just have to figure it out/know how to do it, and it can be a bit harder to execute. In some cases you may need a volunteer to range safety the stage. As others have said, I'm probably just seeing stale stage design locally and others are probably a lot better. Using a scoring system that basically makes the bays irrelevant is an even bigger problem and incredibly stupid. Not only are the bays better designed, but those tasks are far more likely to be needed by civilians defending themselves. Throw in the fact that a lot of the things happening in the longer stages, are retarded and at the end of the day, you are basically just evaluating who is the best retard. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Originally Posted By Razzman1: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: There's lots of ways to do it, that would be better. I don't know what would be "best" but as we've already discussed, the way they do it now is trash. I've seen both T+ and HF and the results for rifle are the same. You end up with a competition where one task is weighted to a degree that the other shooting tasks are irrelevant except when essentially used as tie breakers. The obvious result of doing business that way is beyond retarded. Seeing this as a guy new to competition a few years ago... It really lowered my opinion of competitive shooting. To be blunt, it's just plain ass clownery that significantly degrades the legitimacy of the sport. As an example, the military method is FAR superior. The time stress is induced by the pop up targets. And it also does a fairly good job of replicating the effects of movement. The only thing left to score are hits and misses. I look forward to the new competition that you are going to start running, after you win the lottery so you can afford an automated rifle range with pop-up steel targets! I'll be the first to sign up (for real). Joking aside, I think everyone recognizes that a competition is no replacement for real military-style training, or gear evaluation. It's a game, after all, and most are just playing to have fun. Matches are run by poor-as-fuck volunteers who just want to facilitate other folks having a good time. The match you describe sounds like it would be great fun--and I'd absolutely participate in it. But it also sounds unrealistic financially to run, except for some very wealthy people. There are ways to design and execute a stage to better replicate more depth, breadth and movement with current equipment. You just have to figure it out/know how to do it, and it can be a bit harder to execute. In some cases you may need a volunteer to range safety the stage. As others have said, I'm probably just seeing stale stage design locally and others are probably a lot better. Using a scoring system that basically makes the bays irrelevant is an even bigger problem and incredibly stupid. Not only are the bays better designed, but those tasks are far more likely to be needed by civilians defending themselves. Throw in the fact that a lot of the things happening in the longer stages, are retarded and at the end of the day, you are basically just evaluating who is the best retard. Then quit bitching and set up your match. This retard, as you have called me, would truly love to shoot it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 4:25:53 AM EDT
[#33]
Some emotional mother effer's on this site, that's one thing for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 3:16:51 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By gman556: Some emotional mother effer's on this site, that's one thing for sure. IF YOU DONT RUN EXACTLY WHAT I RUN TO DO EXACTLY WHAT I DO YOURE WRONG.
|
|
|
|
NJ, USA
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 3:22:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: deadmau5er]
[#35]
After multiple ACOGs, all it took was one ELCAN to realize they were overrated.
ACOGs are fantastic optics but their fanbase copes a lot. I'm here to piss all of you off. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 6:17:16 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bnc: That's really the root of disagreement in this entire thread. What is better? What is real world? Without defining those up front the rest of the discussion is pretty meaningless, as we have seen. I'm going to lock my Aimpoint, Razor, and ACOG in the safe together and see which one survives the night. If you put an EOTech in there, the battery will explode and take them all out. Winner.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 6:53:09 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PacNW5: If you put an EOTech in there, the battery will explode and take them all out. Winner. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PacNW5: Originally Posted By bnc: That's really the root of disagreement in this entire thread. What is better? What is real world? Without defining those up front the rest of the discussion is pretty meaningless, as we have seen. I'm going to lock my Aimpoint, Razor, and ACOG in the safe together and see which one survives the night. If you put an EOTech in there, the battery will explode and take them all out. Winner. Add a sig and a gen 1 40 cal Glock and I'll bet we would see the mushroom cloud for here
|
|
|
|
CO, USA
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 8:19:01 PM EDT
[#38]
Thousands of men have gone into battle with an ACOG....are there enough of those brave souls out there who hate it enough that I should care? I probably still won't care. Even if they do theoretically exist (they don't), LPVO is for gamers who don't even dip tobacco, can't drink whiskey neat, and need not shave. Men use ACOG and fists and testosterone and intellect.
The church of ACOG is like food in China: not everyone gets it, but if you do, you are special and powerful. I like ACOG's. I also paid off the mortgage. Coincidence? I think not. That said, I'm giving a VCOG a shot, cause I hate money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 10:34:14 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By stevelish: Thousands of men have gone into battle with an ACOG....are there enough of those brave souls out there who hate it enough that I should care? I probably still won't care. Even if they do theoretically exist (they don't), LPVO is for gamers who don't even dip tobacco, can't drink whiskey neat, and need not shave. Men use ACOG and fists and testosterone and intellect. The church of ACOG is like food in China: not everyone gets it, but if you do, you are special and powerful. I like ACOG's. I also paid off the mortgage. Coincidence? I think not. That said, I'm giving a VCOG a shot, cause I hate money. For the same price of a VCOG, there are better options. |
|
|
|
CO, USA
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 11:48:07 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 45-Seventy: For the same price of a VCOG, there are better options. I really hate money. I figure it will be the most durable option for an LPVO, which is my current jam. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/5/2024 2:11:54 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HawkinsID: I just figured it out. Most gamers are like the soccer moms that go to cardio kickboxing class and somehow think what they are doing has prepared them for a street fight. They can’t see beyond the limitations of their artificial construct. There is so much fail in the above comments, it is hard to know where to start. Why limit yourself to 1x when you can have magnification instantly at hand. The idea is to optimize your performance, not minimize it. Coyotes and people blend in. Good luck with your red dot in the early morning low light on a brown target. By the way, people blend in too. It’s called camo. You don’t know how much time you have in the real world before the target is gone. I’m not wasting time fiddling with a scope while I should be focusing on the threat. Bad guys in vehicles move faster than coyotes. Smart bad guys get behind cover. There is no such thing as a man size target after the shooting starts. You get a head, leg, or other small body part at best. So, the size comment is wrong too. At first, I thought you had an interesting perspective and the experience to back it. Now, having re-read the thread and this confusing analysis you’ve extrapolated from coyote hunting and applied to a gunfight, I realize you have neither experience or expertise. Your gear does not determine your skillset. Your skillset will influence your gear, but ultimately, it’s the indian, not the arrow. By all means though, I’ll be sure to tell the professional gunfighters I get the privilege to shoot with that their URG-Is and Razor 1-6s absolutely suck because some guy on the internet was coyote hunting one time. Train harder. Shoot better. Read more. Post less. |
|
|
|
ID, USA
|
Posted: 3/5/2024 1:09:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: HawkinsID]
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HimIOwe: At first, I thought you had an interesting perspective and the experience to back it. Now, having re-read the thread and this confusing analysis you’ve extrapolated from coyote hunting and applied to a gunfight, I realize you have neither experience or expertise. Your gear does not determine your skillset. Your skillset will influence your gear, but ultimately, it’s the indian, not the arrow. By all means though, I’ll be sure to tell the professional gunfighters I get the privilege to shoot with that their URG-Is and Razor 1-6s absolutely suck because some guy on the internet was coyote hunting one time. Train harder. Shoot better. Read more. Post less. You assume my experience is limited to the hunting story I told. Wrong. Then, you state a platitude that is incorrect. The "Indian, not the arrow" is retarded and a myth. It is the Indian and the arrow." You started to get it. Then, you let your normalcy bias reverse your common sense. The principle is simple. Instant 1x is superior to flipping a scope back and forth because in the real world, a threat can show up at unexpected distances and unexpected times. It is like trying to explain water is wet to this echo chamber. It is borderline cult like. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/5/2024 2:13:28 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HawkinsID: You assume my experience is limited to the hunting story I told. Wrong. Then, you state a platitude that is incorrect. The "Indian, not the arrow" is retarded and a myth. It is the Indian and the arrow." You started to get it. Then, you let your normalcy bias reverse your common sense. The principle is simple. Instant 1x is superior to flipping a scope back and forth because in the real world, a threat can show up at unexpected distances and unexpected times. It is like trying to explain water is wet to this echo chamber. It is borderline cult like. Look man, I too can google a list of logical fallacies and then apply it to an argument. You decided to attack the individual behind the argument, and then make a claim with no substantiating evidence to support it. You see why everyone here realizes you’re backed into a corner? If you had experience outside of coyote hunting (which, I will say, you continue failing to expound upon) you would know a threat at this “unexpected distance” becomes an issue of training, not gear. Most of the guys I shoot with point and shoot without acquiring a sight picture when that surprise target pops up, and they still do better than the majority of shooters out there. It’s almost as if presenting your rifle and learning point and shoot concepts thousands of times over is important. If professionals are capable of making an LPVO work with tens of thousands of rounds of training, I’m going to assume the premise that LPVOs are not the problem, my lack of skillset is. Accordingly, I will concede that LPVOs are not the “easiest” to transition to the moving target at an unknown distance, but training will augment that shortcoming. They’re not limited to “gamer guns” and dead weight in the “real world” and if you ever saw outside your make believe little bubble of tactical application, you’d realize how stupid your argument is. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/5/2024 2:52:14 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HawkinsID: You assume my experience is limited to the hunting story I told. Wrong. Then, you state a platitude that is incorrect. The "Indian, not the arrow" is retarded and a myth. It is the Indian and the arrow." You started to get it. Then, you let your normalcy bias reverse your common sense. The principle is simple. Instant 1x is superior to flipping a scope back and forth because in the real world, a threat can show up at unexpected distances and unexpected times. It is like trying to explain water is wet to this echo chamber. It is borderline cult like. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HawkinsID: Originally Posted By HimIOwe: At first, I thought you had an interesting perspective and the experience to back it. Now, having re-read the thread and this confusing analysis you’ve extrapolated from coyote hunting and applied to a gunfight, I realize you have neither experience or expertise. Your gear does not determine your skillset. Your skillset will influence your gear, but ultimately, it’s the indian, not the arrow. By all means though, I’ll be sure to tell the professional gunfighters I get the privilege to shoot with that their URG-Is and Razor 1-6s absolutely suck because some guy on the internet was coyote hunting one time. Train harder. Shoot better. Read more. Post less. You assume my experience is limited to the hunting story I told. Wrong. Then, you state a platitude that is incorrect. The "Indian, not the arrow" is retarded and a myth. It is the Indian and the arrow." You started to get it. Then, you let your normalcy bias reverse your common sense. The principle is simple. Instant 1x is superior to flipping a scope back and forth because in the real world, a threat can show up at unexpected distances and unexpected times. It is like trying to explain water is wet to this echo chamber. It is borderline cult like. You should never be allowed to post on a technical thread again. |
|
|
|
IL, USA
|
Posted: 3/6/2024 1:29:38 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HawkinsID: I just figured it out. Most gamers are like the soccer moms that go to cardio kickboxing class and somehow think what they are doing has prepared them for a street fight. They can’t see beyond the limitations of their artificial construct. Are you saying the people here with military service and combat deployments are lying about their backgrounds? Because if you insist on calling them gamers with no real world experience/context, you're implying just that. |
|
|
IL, USA
|
Posted: 3/6/2024 1:33:36 PM EDT
[#46]
I've been following LPVO threads for a while and still haven't found an explicit answer to this:
If you use an LPVO with an offset or piggyback red dot, under what circumstances would you use the 1x instead of the RDS? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2024 1:44:39 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ButterBacon: I've been following LPVO threads for a while and still haven't found an explicit answer to this: If you use an LPVO with an offset or piggyback red dot, under what circumstances would you use the 1x instead of the RDS? A piggyback is slower than shooting 1x through a daylight bright LPVO due to the higher cheekweld. The offset is a little faster than the 1x LPVO so if time is a consideration and you’re not doing night work, that’s the better option. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2024 1:45:01 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ButterBacon: I've been following LPVO threads for a while and still haven't found an explicit answer to this: If you use an LPVO with an offset or piggyback red dot, under what circumstances would you use the 1x instead of the RDS? Depends on mission set. Typically I keep mine on nvg mode and use it for passive. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/6/2024 5:43:30 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ButterBacon: I've been following LPVO threads for a while and still haven't found an explicit answer to this: If you use an LPVO with an offset or piggyback red dot, under what circumstances would you use the 1x instead of the RDS? By default. The circumstances I use the RDS are the exceptions. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/7/2024 1:22:59 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By hoody2shoez: Depends on mission set. Typically I keep mine on nvg mode and use it for passive. How far forward on the rifle is your LPVO mounted? I don't like having an optic bump my PVS14 under recoil. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
