I've tried LVPOs three times and just can't get into them. The last one was pretty dang good and I kept it the longest of the three but in the end it was just too bulky for me and I sold it. I'd really like to try an NX8 since it's about the length of a RDS and magnifier combo but the price is holding me back, I'd hate to drop that much on something I might end up selling anyway. Right now I just have a RDS and 3x magnifier, it's not perfect either but I rarely shoot past 120yds and this combo works for that.

It would be really cool if somebody could design an LPVO that's the size of an ACOG with a forgiving eyebox, good eye relief and sub 14oz but that's probably a pipe dream.

It's normal LPVO size, but otherwise have you considered a TR24? Aside from the lack of decent reticles, I think they are great all-rounders.

The triangle post is close to red-dot fast.
Has a good 1x.
Has a forgiving eye box and relief.
Is ~14oz without a mount.

A couple were/are. Not all of them.

I know every LPVO is a compromise, but have you looked at the PA PLXc 1-8?  16.9 oz, Japanese glass, fairly compact, good illumination, really nice build construction, and quite a bit cheaper than the NF.  I have both the PLXc (meters reticle) and a NF ATACR and greatly prefer the PA.

I'd like to try a PA lvpo, but everything they make is a bdc reticle with those dumb ass human specific ranging hashes or so cluttered as to be distracting. I get their primary market is the competition and larp crowd, but damn.

I'd it so much to ask for a simple T milling reticle?

This is where I am at.

I've done enough 3-gun with fixed 4x to realized for CQB that's just a bit too much inside 35 yards.  I will completely not see targets at all and not well engage the field of encounter area efficiently at that high mag.    And yet have done  enough distance shooting that a red dot alone can work at 200 yards, but a bit tricky.

I've found (for me), 2.5x fixed is a very nice do-all fixed low power general purpose and mostly what I run on 12"-18".  I standardized on the PA 2.5x CQB as a cost effective performance effective uniform unit across them all.  Which, apparently they now discontinued - wish I knew that was coming.  I ended up with a nice 4x ACOG, but found I don't care for it for general purpose as again, just too much mag for run and gun CQB.  It fits nicely on a 14.5" Grendel field gun though.  I will say, with Low power fixed, reticle matters a lot - and IMHO that PA CQB 2.5X was by for the best general purpose design for that - that catered to snap 10 yard as well as precision 500 yard shots

For 10.5-11.5", I just run a bare red dot.  300 yards isn't that guns mission statement, and you can do more with a red dot than you think - if you have to.  Recall 20 years ago all this was done with irons, and a red dot is better then that.

I don't like most LPVO's as I find them heavy and clunky.  And I'm into FFP, if variable, and most don't have very good CQB low power reticle- especially unpowered.  I did experiment with a 45degree red dot and again just found it to make for a clunky complicated system that you had to decide which to use - under speed and stress, I don't like having to decide more things than I really have to.  That's for me.  Some 3 guners do amazing.  Of course, they also tend to be heavily practiced and have the benefit of knowing course of fire in a mostly static field and predefined that they control the pace through, but sure.  The one time I handled a LPVO rig + RMR recently I found it to be a heavy complicated heavy beast of a weapon system -personally.  This is for me.  Others have their own experiences.  For me, when there is stress and things aren't working right, I lose about 50 IQ in a dynamic "why isn't this working/ what do I do?" Setting.  Complicated systems aren't a good pairing with that.  They work nice on a pleasant Sunday when I get to answer "do you understand the course of fire?", I suppose.

I moved away from red dot + magnifier a long time ago for similar reasons.  And I don't care for systems you have to screw around with.  I like fixed low power because that's what it is.  Never on the wrong setting.  Never something to think about adjusting.  Never having to decide which sight to use.  Lift gun, there it is.  With fixed low power (2-3x type range) get on target, focus on target, send shot.  That's it - every time. Nothing else other than engagement things, to think about .

This is objectively false. They have mil based reticles for nearly every scope now, with ranging hashes outside of the main focus which provides the utility without cluttering anything.

You mean like this reticle they’ve offered basically forever?

Attached File

I have an astigmatism and see a Starburst on an rds.

Is still usable but annoying. Eotechs are terrible for my eyes.

I have a 13.9 I just changed from a burris rt-6 to a viper pst gen 2 1-6. So far its fantastic... but she is long and heavy. If the burris was daylight bright...anyway...

My main home defense is a 12.5. It has a burris rt-6. Now i am debating another viper 1-6...a Starburst rds or a PA Glx prism.

I am a fan of PA...However, can I trust my family's lives to a PA Glx prism?

But, they remain married to that damn ^, and that kills it for me.  I actually own one of their prisms and it is a nice optic for the money, but I would gladly pay more for a + or .

I have significant astigmatism, but still prefer red dots on CQB guns.  If I flip up the rear buis and sight through it and the rds, the small aperture sharpens the dot for longer distances.

I also have an astigmatism and typically see a starburst with a RDS.

I still use them because it doesn’t matter.

I believe you can.  The PA stuff has been pretty thoroughly tested, and abused by people like AKOU, over the years and has held up well.  There are always outliers, but a stout prism with an etched reticle is pretty dependable.  The weak link in the new micro prisms seems to be the factory mount, but there are after market options.  The GLX is a different animal and appears to be a great optic, all around.

Astigmatism really hit me hard and left me with a stable of RDS' I didn't like anymore.  The PA prisms with there adjustable ocular really work for me.  I'm trying their LPVOs now and like them, as well.  They all work well with my rather significant astigmatism.  I like the reticles, also, and don't seem to have the problem others have with the chevron based system.

No, I mean something like the SWFA Mil-quad reticle or the now discontinued Burris CQ-Mil or SCR Mil reticles.

A simple T with mil hashes.  It's just my preference, but I absolutely hate the busy christmas tree reticles.

Exactly, based. Not a simple T mil reticle.

ETA: this has probably become my all-time favorite reticle

I have an astigmatism and get a slight starburst on a RDS but still use them. If I can hit a 6" target at 200yds with my RDS topped rack grade rifle shooting run of the mill M193 or M855 I'm happy and I'm still able to do that with my aging eyes and a RDS.

I could get a slightly used NX8 for what the PLXc costs. Either way that's a lot of coin for me to spend on one optic and I'm not quite ready to jump to that next level. Plus, how can I flex on the poors with a Primary Arms optic.

If PA offered that in their prisms I would have more than one.  I would like to see a bigger circle/horseshoe closer to the perimeter for CQB instead of the little circle tho.

Kinda sorta like this, with just mils on the post in stead of BDC

That's what I disliked about the ATACR.  Great glass and a really nice optic all around, but I found myself really hunting for what I needed to see in the reticle.  The reason I chose the meters reticle in the PA PLXc 1-8 is because it was not nearly as busy as the yards reticle or the MIL reticle in the same scope.  I know a lot of folks here hate the chevron that PA seems to really like.  I too would prefer a simple dot, but after using it, I don't even really notice the chevron--just point and shoot.  As far as the BDC--this has been beaten to death, and there's no reason to rehash it.  Some like it's features and some don't.  I'm playing games with my optic, and, for me, having a BDC that will easily get me on a chest-sized piece of steel out to 600 with M193 with very little thinking is exactly what I need/want.  I'm very happy with it.

Contact them about it.  You're not the only person with complaints about the prism reticles.  But, I do see some people wanting a dot only, so you may be an outlier with the T thing.  They offer a variety, so maybe it's easy to program something new into the laser.  I wouldn't mind a donut of death (DoD) with a dot for CQB and a simple T, like you have, but I also like what PA offers right now.

Only some.

1.25/1.5 means it’s not reduced.
They do have some models that are 1-6/8 using a reduction lens to achieve 1X like everyone else though.

Whell .... you've got me there!