AR Sponsor
Posted: 1/31/2019 5:37:55 PM EDT
|
Hello to Everyone,
GRSC is back as an industry partner. We are about to release our new 1.1-10x30 Full Spectrum Optic (FSO) for sale. I have been working on developing this product for the last two years. We expect to start delivering in early March 2019. Here is some information on it. 
Here is a video of the FSO T-1 Reticle Ranging on a person's head and shoulders at 200 yards.  1.1-10x30 FSO Reticle Ranging at 200 yards Here is a video of the FSO T-1 Reticle Ranging on a person's head and shoulders at 300 yards.  1.1-10x30 FSO Reticle Ranging at 300 yards Here is a video of the FSO T-1 Reticle Ranging on person's head and shoulders at 500 yards.  1.1-10x30 Reticle Ranging at 500 yards The 1.1-10x30 GRSC FSO T-1 Reticle is designed to be used to engage targets from CQB to 1200 yards. This scope in combination with the T-1 Reticle will allow you to quickly: Find your target ID your target Range your target Engage your target The T-1 Reticle also allows leads for: Moving targets and wind I will be putting up videos with more definitive instructions on the function of the T-1 Reticle soon. The new grscinc.com website is under construction, please be patient. Interested dealers please contact me: 951 845 9838 EDIT: GRSC Full Spectrum Optic (FSO) T1 Reticle Tutorial Part 1  Part 1 T 1 reticle instructions GRSC Full Spectrum Optic (FSO) T1 Reticle Tutorial Part 2  Part 2 T 1 reticle insturctions GRSC 1.1-10x30 Full Spectrum Optic (FSO)  GRSC 1.1-10x30 Full Spectrum Optic (FSO) Thank you, Ed Verdugo |
|
Quoted:
Any plans for other reticle options? That horseshoe is mighty thick for my preference/use. |
|
Quoted:
This is the best reticle ever made. The horseshoe only comes into play at CQB distances, which you want. At higher mag range, you are using the smaller center dot or hold offs. Get behind one and you’ll understand. Quoted:
Quoted:
Any plans for other reticle options? That horseshoe is mighty thick for my preference/use. |
|
Quoted:
Nope, I’ve owned multiple horseshoe reticles and could not stand how cluttered they were. Just not my preference but I see the appeal to them. Reticle selection is very subjective. But, it’s nice to see companies bringing out more 1-10x scopes, which I believe has the potential to be the perfect all around scope. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Any plans for other reticle options? That horseshoe is mighty thick for my preference/use. |
|
Quoted:
I concur. I had one of the original 1-4 with this reticle. I prefer a simple cross hair with mil or bdc. Much faster at 1x Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Any plans for other reticle options? That horseshoe is mighty thick for my preference/use. |
|
Quoted:
Do you have any dealers already? Can I preorder? We will not accept money until we have product in stock. We will posting information how to get on a preorder list very soon. Thanks, Ed Verdugo |
|
Quoted:
@GRSC Where are these made? Curious about glass quality. For the price point i am assuming China, but they have been able to produce some impressive stuff lately like the Athlon Ares ETR and PA 3-18 so not a bad thing if comparable quality to those Thanks Ed Verdugo |
|
Quoted:
Appears to be from same OEM as the Atibal 1-10. I do not have an exclusive on this scope so you will soon see other variations of this scope sold by other companies. The Atibal scope is made by the same manufacture as my scope. I assume most of you know that most of the current American scope companies do not manufacture their own scopes. They spec out a scope from a OEM manufacture, buy it, and sell it under their company lable. Thanks Ed Verdugo |
|
I think it is very important to understand the concept of the LPVO in the Full Spectrum Optic (FSO) role.
This post is from another thread discussing the concept, purpose and development of the 1-6x24 Combat Rifle Scope (CRS). The same concept lead to the development of the 1.1-10x30 Full Spectrum Optic (FSO). Since the 1-6 CRS and the 1.1-10 FSO use a very similar reticle design they perform in the same manner, so most of what you are about to read and see carries over to the 1.1-10 FSO. Toward the end of this post you will see some pictures comparing the performance of the 1-6 CRS and 1.1-10 FSO on steel targets at 1025 yards. Here is some information you may find interesting about the development and capabilities of the 1-6x24 CRS. When I first introduced the concept of the FSO 1-6x24 FFP Horseshoe reticle scope for use on a modern assault rifle or battle carbine the concept was met with a lot of resistance. Why do we need a 1-6? FFP reticle scope----NO WAY. Horseshoe reticle-----THAT THINK IS STUPID---WAY TO BIG!!!!!! Interesting. Look what the Army just purchased, the SIG TANGO 6. Please let me clarify that the Horseshoe reticle in the scope I developed and the Horseshoe reticle in the Sig scope are similar but I don't think the Sig scope uses the "RULE Of Ten" in their reticle. Our scope is made and assembled in Japan. The R&D and T&E of our CRS and FSO spans a period of about 40 years. We have done a lot of testing in those years developing of our 1-6x24 Combat Rifle Scope (CRS) and our 1.1-10x30 Full Spectrum Optic (FSO). This thread is about a optic for use on a Assault Rifle (AR) or Battle Carbine (BC) in Combat. My comments will be based on that. Before I go any further let me define some of the terms I will be using. Full spectrum: From CQB distance to max effective range of a AR or BC, day or night (augmented with NVDs). Maximum effective range (hits on target): The maximum range at which the average shooter will hit the target (human) more than he misses it. Maximum effective range, terminal ballistics (damage done to flesh or incapacitation). We are not talking about this here. Point target engagement: a specific size target that you can expect to hit to a specific distance. Example, a human head would be a point target to about 300 yards. A human chest would be a point target to about 600 yards. Area target engagement: A specific size target at a specific distance that you do not expect to hit but hope to hit. Example: A human head would be a area target for a assault/battle rifle or battle carbine at 1,000 yards. Package: your rifle--scope and ammo. Intrinsic accuracy: The maximum degree of accuracy that a package can deliver when not affected by outside factors such as wind or human error (movement) etc. Practical accuracy: The degree of accuracy obtainable when used in the real world taking into account factors such as wind and human error etc. Anatomical reticle: The reticle in the CRS and FSO is based on the size of the average adult human body (male). In the military I was taught: Head: ~ 8 to 10" Shoulder width: ~ 18 to 20" Shoulder to mid sternum: ~10'' Width of a man front to back (sideways) mid sternum: ~ 10 to 12" I call this the "RULE OF 10". The scale in the CRS and FSO reticle is based on 10''. The primary ranging system of the CRS and FSO reticle is based on the head. The head is the most uniform part of the body from any angle. Secondary ranging system is based on shoulders and you can also range on a man using his body width (man facing sideways). In the military I was taught to lead a moving target or adjust for wind by estimating aiming leadings in body widths. The Horseshoe is designed to allow you to do this out to 300 yards. Starting at 400 yards the CRS and FSO reticle has a series of horizontal gaps and dashes. These are in 10'' increments (BODY WIDTH) at the given distance.This reticle is in the FFP so the gaps and dashes remain 10 inches at any magnification at any distance. This allows you to adjust your aiming point for wind or moving targets in body widths. On the 5.56 reticle there is a MIL DOT scale on a horizontal plane at the 3 and 9 o'clock position of the Horseshoe. This can be used for milling a target or to determine cant. On the .308 reticle there is also a MIL DOT scale on a vertical and horizontal plane. KISS !!!! It is very easy to learn how to use this reticle and more important, REMEMBER how to use it when the bullets are flying and people are dying. OK----So hear we go. From the beginning the objective was to develop a rugged optic that would help keep our war fighters alive in combat. The concept called for a Full Spectrum Combat Optic (FSCO) for the modern assault/battle rifle and battle carbine. I named this the CRS. I was taught in the military that the max effective range for the M14 or M16 was about 600 yards. I was also taught when using a magnified optic you should have 1X for every 100 yards distance to your target. Based on that and about 20 years of T&E I decided that the CRS should be a 1-6 scope with a illuminated FFP reticle. Also the scope should have simple, fast, intuitive anatomical reticle that would allow the scope to fulfill the FSCO role. In my opinion the scope should have capped turrets and all aiming adjustments and ranging of the target would be done on the reticle. Several years ago we teamed up with a top scope manufacture from Japan and got it done. With the improvement of rifle barrels and ammo in the last few years we are able to extend the Max Effective Range (hits on target). Initially the reticle (M4-62reticle) was calibrated to the M855 5.56 ammo fired from a 14.5" barreled (M4 type) rifle with a 1 in 7" twist. The M4-62 reticle is calibrated to 800 yards. After we got that done we did a new reticle (175-16 reticle) calibrated for the M 118 LR ammo fired from a 16" barreled .308 rifle (battle carbine)t with a 1 in 10" twist . The 175-16 reticle is calibrated to 1,200 yards. Now here is what we have found after a lot of testing with these scopes. The max effective range with our current infantry rifles and ammo is farther than 600 yards. It is important to remember that the package is zeroed at 100 yards and all aiming corrections are made on the reticle. We DO NOT touch the W/E turrets. We have tested the 5.56 rifles with 14.5" and 16" 1 in 7" twist barrels using 55 gr, 62 gr and 77 gr ammo to 1,000 yards on human sized targets. We have found max effective range for point target engagement on a human size targets is about 800 yds with the 5.56 ammo. Best accuracy results are achieved with the 77 gr ammo. The 55 and 62 gr is iffy at this distance but it has been done. The BIG problem Is the wind at that distance. There is a poa/poi difference in elevation when using different weight ammo but it is easy to correct for using the reticle. Based on the intrinsic accuracy and field testing of this package I believe max effective range (point target) will be about 800 yards when using the 77gr ammo. . 5.56 Package We have been able to get hits on target torso sized targets to 1,000 yards (area target engagement ) when using the 77gr 5.56 ammo with the 175-16 (.308) reticle. The ballistic path of the 77gr. ammo out of a 16" 1 in7" twist barrel is very close to the ballistic path of the M118LR ammo out of a .308 rifle with a 16" barrel to 1,000 yards. .308 Package With the .308 package we are getting consistent max effective range on point (20"x35") target engagement to 1,000 yards and area target engagement to 1,200 yards. Again based on our testing and the intrinsic accuracy of this package I believe max effective range is about 1,000 yards. We have tested this package with higher magnification scopes and did not see a improvement in practical accuracy until we got to 10X and beyond and that was a very slight improvement, but our testing has been limited in this regard. At this point I am of the opinion that the 1-6 and the 1-8 scopes we have tested deliver the same degree of practical accuracy at max effective range with this package. Please don't get me wrong, myself and the other testers did like the extra 2X offered by the 1-8 scopes. This would be beneficial for target ID etc. but the extra 2X did not seem to translate to more hits on target or better shot placement. More testing may change my opinion. Up to this point I have been talking about max effective range (long range) performance. The #1 priority for the CRS and FSO was CQB performance. Up close you will be faster than your enemy or you will be dead. I believe we can all agree the fastest/best optics for CQB engagements are the red dot gun sights (RDS) like the Aimpoint or Eotech. I think a properly designed LPV can equal or even beat a (RDS) in the CQB environment..Three gun shooters using LPVs in competition bear witness to this. The learning curve for the LPV will probably be a little longer . We have found that eye relief, eye box reticle illumination (indoors) and "fitting" the rifle to the shooter is critical for speed in the CQB environment. In our testing we find the LPVs start to dominate the RDS beyond 100 yards. We have found that ILLUMINATION and RETICLE design are the most important factors in the performance of FSCO. Question; if you are carrying a GP (general purpose) rifle in a combat environment that has max effective range of 800 to 1,000 yards why would you want to put a optic on that rifle that would limit your max effective range to 500 yards or less? Especially when you could put a LPV on that rifle that gives up little or nothing compared to a RDS in the CQB role. Yes I know about OUNCES EQAULS POUNDS AND POUNDS EQUALS PAIN, been there done that, but I also know about carrying a piece of equipment that won't get the job done. We have tested our CRS side by side against other scopes that had better glass better illumination and more magnification. The reticle in the CRS is what would give the CRS the edge. Example: we are shooting out to 1,000 yards. CRS vs Burris 1-8 with a FFP BDC reticle calibrated for 5.56 out to 600 yards. The Burris scope was on a 17" F&D .308 rifle. The CRS was on a 16" LWRC REPR. AMMO-- M118 LR. Burris set at 8x, CRS set at 6x. From 100 to 600 yards the performance of the scopes was the same. With the Burris scope we stopped at 600 yards because to shoot beyond 600 yards with the reticle in the Burris we would have to KNOW our DOPE for that package and use the turrets to dial in the the aiming corrections for the different distances. NOT very practical in a dynamic firefight. WE don't KNOW the DOPE for that package or the REPR package. With the reticle in the CRS we don't need to KNOW the dope, we just need to KNOW the distance to the target and make the aiming corrections on the reticle. The CRS reticle allows you to range a human target very quickly. With the CRS we were able to hit every target to 1,000 yards just using the reticle. We got similar results using the Bushnell 1-8, VCOG and Kahles 1-6. The reticles in these scope were the weak link. Illumination: The CRS has the whole BDC reticle illuminated and is adjustable for brightness. This allows you to use the BDC reticle indoors and to the maximum range to which it is calibrated in a low light environment. It also works very well with clip on NVDs. Other scopes that only illuminate the top portion of the reticle will require you to use your turrets to engage targets at longer distances in a low light environment. Some have criticized the scope because the illumination is not day time bright. This is a valid criticism, but we have never found the illumination lacking in a indoors environment and don't find it necessary outdoors on a bright day. The size and thickness of the Horseshoe portion of the reticle was designed to be used at low power for fast hits on target (Combat Accuracy) from CQB distances to 300 yards in day light without illumination. I think the following videos will illustrate this point. WHAT WILL HAPPEN WITH A SCOPE THAT DEPENDS ON ITS ILLUMINATED RETICLE TO TO BE FAST ON TARGET IF THE ILLUMINATION FAILS? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrhooRYDUn0&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSzcsrXIMyU Here are some pictures of what you can do with the CRS at various distances. Here's Pepper at 1,000 yards. 12 shots.. 5 hits! Pepper claims that is two hits on the right shoulder. So that would be 6 hits. Notice Pepper's hair (wind). 
Here's Pepper at 1,025 yards. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnWA-Vt8CS4 Here's the CRS out to 535 yards day and night, using PVS 22. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5Sr6ardD2I Here's some groups we shot at 100 yards. 
10 shots 7 hits at 1,025 yards. 
Area target engagement on a 10 inch plate at 1,025 yards. 30 shots 5 hits. 
CRS at night using PVS 22 
 We have also been testing a prototype of a new 1-10x30 scope. I was able to do a side by side test at 1025 yards with our 1-6 CRS and a prototype of a 1-10x30 we are testing. CRS was set at 6x the prototype was set at 10x. Rifles used were .308 with 16'' 1 in 10 twist barrels. Ammo M118 LR. Target 20'' X26''. Fired two five shot groups, one with each rifle. Hit the target 3 out of five shots with each rifle. Hits with the O around the bullet were made with 10x prototype scope. Hits with the X on the bullet strike were made with 6x CRS. Group size for 3 hits at 1025 yard: 1-6 CRS=12'' 1-10 prototype=13''  Next pictures 1025 yards, target 20x24'' and 20x26''. 1-6 CRS 3 out of 5 hits on target. Group size 20'' 1-10 prototype 2 out of 5 hits. Group size 17'' 
 There doesn't seem to be a big difference in practical accuracy at this range with the extra 4X. Here is another example: same day same rifle (REPR) scope, ammo, etc. different target. Target: 12'' disk (sectional) 1025 yards. Take the rifle out of bag. I didn't check zero. Aim dead on with 1025 aiming point on reticle. First shot (cold bore), spotter calls elevation dead on windage approx 3' right. Second shot, same aiming point to confirm. Spotter calls same impact. 3' is 36'' so I compensate on the reticle using the rule of 10''. Here is the 3rd shot. 
I hope you all found this interesting and it will give a little better understanding of the capabilities of the 1-6x24 CRS scope, (and now the 1.1-10x30 FSO). Ed Verdugo |
|
one reply says...
"These scopes are made in China using Chinese HD glass. I think you will be impressed with the quality of the glass and the scope." Thanks Ed Verdugo Another says... "Please let me clarify that the Horseshoe reticle in the scope I developed and the Horseshoe reticle in the Sig scope are similar but I don't think the Sig scope uses the "RULE Of Ten" in their reticle. Our scope is made and assembled in Japan." Im confused 
Edit... So, the 1-6 is made in Japan... |
|
Quoted:
one reply says... "These scopes are made in China using Chinese HD glass. I think you will be impressed with the quality of the glass and the scope." Thanks Ed Verdugo Another says... "Please let me clarify that the Horseshoe reticle in the scope I developed and the Horseshoe reticle in the Sig scope are similar but I don't think the Sig scope uses the "RULE Of Ten" in their reticle. Our scope is made and assembled in Japan." Im confused
Edit... So, the 1-6 is made in Japan... Sorry about the confusion. The 1-6 CRS scope is made in Japan. The 1.1-10 FSO is made in China. I should have explained that the post you are referring to is about the concept and the factors that influenced the development of the 1-6 CRS and now the 1.1-10 FSO. Also the intended purpose of the the 1-6 CRS and the 1.1-10 FSO. Since the 1.1-10 FSO uses a reticle design that is very similar to the reticle in the 1-6 CRS it performs in the same manner. I will go back and edit the intro to that post in effort to clear up the confusion. Thanks for pointing that out. Ed Verdugo |
|
holy shit. blast from the past.
welcome back. love my 1-6, cant wait to get my hands on one of these. i was actually just shopping around for a 1-8 or 1-10 a few weeks ago. if its half as good at taking abuse as my 1-6 its a steal at the price. my only one teenie tiny complaint is that i wish it was mil/mil and had a chevron. for whatever reason i shoot better with it. maybe its just a preference or a habit. i will for sure be buying one of these. |
| What a nice surprise! Was wondering when this would happen. Looking forward to looking at the details soon. What kind of warranty will this have and what scopes would you compare the glass too, is it the exact same glass Atibal is using in their X? The price is quite amazing! |
|
Definitely have my interest.... @GRSC would you be willing to send one to @LRRPF52 to T&E (if you haven't already).
I know he seems to be a fan of your 1-4x or 1-6x (can't remember which, maybe both) and he has a respected opinion on this forum. I for one would be very interested in his review in order to make a purchase decision for myself and others. Thanks, Chase |
|
Over the years, I've gone back and forth on ballistic cam turrets, crosshair Mil-Dot reticles, stadia reticles, and mil hash reticles with matching turrets.
For precision rifle matches where you are shooting 2 MOA targets or less, you're using high magnification, large scopes with the ability to dial pretty much as a rule. For lightweight carbines that are ubiquitous and fast on man-sized and partial sin targets, I really like a stadia reticle like the one in the GRSC. I wish we could have had something like this on M16s and M4s when I was in the Army, as it would have provided a critical Designated Marksmen capability with far reduced training demands for range estimation and holds. The trajectory is laid out before you in this reticle, with an intuitive way to determine range. It is a very practical reticle. I put a 1-4x24 on my 12" Grendel. No BS, I literally take that pistol out of the bag, insert a 25rd magazine, place the 800yd stadia line on a 2'x3' steel buffalo, and start sending rounds onto it. Over the past few range sessions this year when I've gone down there, I have done that. My first shot might be off the right edge from wind, but then I use that as my new aiming point and let the rest fly onto the target. Keep in mind that I'm using the magazine as a monopod. Very fun. Last time I was down with my family letting the little kids shoot for the first time. I told them to listen and broke shot-after-shot on that target, with the repeated satisfaction of hearing the ding each time. The 1.1-10x will allow me to get better resolution on the target compared to 1-4x or 1-6x. 
1-6x24 Japanese LOW/GRSC/Norden Performance Scope on my 18" LaRue: 
|
|
Quoted:
Appears to be from same OEM as the Atibal 1-10. ETA: I’m really digging this scope. At Ed’s price point this is a strong contender for my next glass. |
|
Quoted:
I saw Atibal’s ad today and thought the same thing. Only they want $799.00 for it. ETA: I’m really digging this scope. At Ed’s price point this is a strong contender for my next glass. Quoted:
Quoted:
Appears to be from same OEM as the Atibal 1-10. ETA: I’m really digging this scope. At Ed’s price point this is a strong contender for my next glass. Current scopes with these features are over $2,000 and 1.5x on the low end. Somebody in China has either figured out something pretty special to drop the price by 75% or they're cutting serious corners. I'm going to have to remain skeptical until these hit the streets. |
|
Quoted:
Eyebox. The eye box at 1x is very good. Of course at 10x it tightens up but none of the testers have complained about the eye box over all. In fact everyone tends to agree that over all it is very good. No need to take my word for this. I will be getting several of these scope to independent testers as soon a the first batch comes in. We will se what they say. Thanks Ed Verdugo |
|
Quoted:
What a nice surprise! Was wondering when this would happen. Looking forward to looking at the details soon. What kind of warranty will this have and what scopes would you compare the glass too, is it the exact same glass Atibal is using in their X? The price is quite amazing! Glass is HD and it looks very good. Of course it is not like S&B, Swarovski etc. Same glass as Atibal? Yes. Good price= low overhead. I am not a big company with a lot of fluff and I worked directly with the OEM supplier to develope this scope. Thanks Ed Verdugo |
|
Quoted:
Definitely have my interest.... @GRSC would you be willing to send one to @LRRPF52 to T&E (if you haven't already). I know he seems to be a fan of your 1-4x or 1-6x (can't remember which, maybe both) and he has a respected opinion on this forum. I for one would be very interested in his review in order to make a purchase decision for myself and others. Thanks, Chase I will arrange to get one to LRRPF52 Thanks Ed Verdugo |
|
Quoted: $650. They'll give you $150 off for pre-order. Current scopes with these features are over $2,000 and 1.5x on the low end. Somebody in China has either figured out something pretty special to drop the price by 75% or they're cutting serious corners. I'm going to have to remain skeptical until these hit the streets. It is really a shame that I have not been able to convince any of the top end American or European companies to work with me on this project. They watch what I develop and then come out with their version of my concepts and designs. I presented the concept and prototype of the Full Spectrum Combat Optic (FSCO) to the US Army at Ft Benning Ga. in Sept. 2005 and the Marines at Camp Pendleton in Feb. 2006. This type of optic should have been in our war fighters hands many years ago. Truth is-- I am skeptical too. Anybody can produce a couple of handmade prototype ringers. The proof will be in the production scopes. I have stressed over and over to the Chinese to make me a solid scope or GAME OVER. Talk is cheap, I put a lot of time effort and money into this project, we will know very soon if it was worth it. I don't think they are cutting corners. I can only hope I and we get our moneys worth. I've taken a lot of risks in my life--Just One More. I have to give the Chinese credit--they were willing to give it try. One more thing on the Chinese, I am sure none of us here on ARFCOM like communism, in fact I think we have more Demoncrats in DC that like communism than Chinese in China that like communism. NOW HERE IS THE KICKER---I THINK THE BEST WAY TO END COMMUNISM IN CHINA IS TO TURN THEM INTO CAPITALISTS. They are gettin a taste of free market capitalism and they LIKE it. Thanks Ed Verdugo |
|
Quoted:
cttb: It is really a shame that I have not been able to convince any of the top end American or European companies to work with me on this project. They watch what I develop and then come out with their version of my concepts and designs. I presented the concept and prototype of the Full Spectrum Combat Optic (FSCO) to the US Army at Ft Benning Ga. in Sept. 2005 and the Marines at Camp Pendleton in Feb. 2006. This type of optic should have been in our war fighters hands many years ago. Truth is-- I am skeptical too. Anybody can produce a couple of handmade prototype ringers. The proof will be in the production scopes. I have stressed over and over to the Chinese to make me a solid scope or GAME OVER. Talk is cheap, I put a lot of time effort and money into this project, we will know very soon if it was worth it. I don't think they are cutting corners. I can only hope I and we get our moneys worth. I've taken a lot of risks in my life--Just One More. I have to give the Chinese credit--they were willing to give it try. One more thing on the Chinese, I am sure none of us here on ARFCOM like communism, in fact I think we have more Demoncrats in DC that like communism than Chinese in China that like communism. NOW HERE IS THE KICKER---I THINK THE BEST WAY TO END COMMUNISM IN CHINA IS TO TURN THEM INTO CAPITALISTS. They are gettin a taste of free market capitalism and they LIKE it. Thanks Ed Verdugo Quoted:
Quoted: $650. They'll give you $150 off for pre-order. Current scopes with these features are over $2,000 and 1.5x on the low end. Somebody in China has either figured out something pretty special to drop the price by 75% or they're cutting serious corners. I'm going to have to remain skeptical until these hit the streets. It is really a shame that I have not been able to convince any of the top end American or European companies to work with me on this project. They watch what I develop and then come out with their version of my concepts and designs. I presented the concept and prototype of the Full Spectrum Combat Optic (FSCO) to the US Army at Ft Benning Ga. in Sept. 2005 and the Marines at Camp Pendleton in Feb. 2006. This type of optic should have been in our war fighters hands many years ago. Truth is-- I am skeptical too. Anybody can produce a couple of handmade prototype ringers. The proof will be in the production scopes. I have stressed over and over to the Chinese to make me a solid scope or GAME OVER. Talk is cheap, I put a lot of time effort and money into this project, we will know very soon if it was worth it. I don't think they are cutting corners. I can only hope I and we get our moneys worth. I've taken a lot of risks in my life--Just One More. I have to give the Chinese credit--they were willing to give it try. One more thing on the Chinese, I am sure none of us here on ARFCOM like communism, in fact I think we have more Demoncrats in DC that like communism than Chinese in China that like communism. NOW HERE IS THE KICKER---I THINK THE BEST WAY TO END COMMUNISM IN CHINA IS TO TURN THEM INTO CAPITALISTS. They are gettin a taste of free market capitalism and they LIKE it. Thanks Ed Verdugo I do think a 1ish to 10x with an objective over 24mm makes more sense than a 1-8 with a 24mm, maybe even a 1-6. Once you make the weight jump beyond most 1-4s, you might as well try to get some serious magnification with a decent exit pupil. These will be interesting to see. Bringing this feature set in at well under $1,000 at 21 ounces with good glass, turrets, and durability will upend the market. |
|
Quoted: Eyebox; The eye box at 1x is very good. Of course at 10x it tightens up but none of the testers have complained about the eye box over all. In fact everyone tends to agree that over all it is very good. No need to take my word for this. I will be getting several of these scope to independent testers as soon a the first batch comes in. We will se what they say. Thanks Ed Verdugo |
|
Quoted:
What is the exit pupil measurement at 1X and 10X? Quoted:
Quoted: Eyebox; The eye box at 1x is very good. Of course at 10x it tightens up but none of the testers have complained about the eye box over all. In fact everyone tends to agree that over all it is very good. No need to take my word for this. I will be getting several of these scope to independent testers as soon a the first batch comes in. We will se what they say. Thanks Ed Verdugo |
|
Ed,
First, this thing looks perfect. If I had a magic wand only thing I’d change is an integrated mount or an option for one. Second, Id buy a few in a heart beat but if its made in China I can’t buy it. We’re in an economic war and the proxy war is when, not if. You’re probably working with good people but their government fucking sucks. I’ve followed your efforts for a while and am very excited for you! Hope it goes well Edit: I'll probably fold and buy one, my interest in supporting small business AR15commer outweighs a chinese product. |
|
Quoted:
Edit: I'll probably fold and buy one, my interest in supporting small business AR15commer outweighs a chinese product. I know about the work Ed has put into this and I fell I love with the reticle years ago but the lower FOV and no lifetime warranty option on the 1-6x kept me looking. I ended up with a lightweight Leupold VX-6 with the CMR2 reticle but now seeing Ed’s 1-10x scope I am considering a switch. I ordered a 1-10x from the same manufacturer to pair with my .224 Valkyrie upper. A BDC reticle won’t fit the ballistics of the .224 so I feel the mil reticle is better for me in that application. The good news is the scope arrived yesterday after handling it I think there may be a lightly used VX-6 in the exchange soon. Quality looks great and looking forward to side by side comparison. Also, for anyone else considering the GCRS, LaRue had a really smoking deal on their new mount with 35mm option. About $100 less then the current model. |
|
@GRSC
Just out of curiosity, do you think the market would support two different "tiers" (I hate using that word) of the same scope? One made in China at $xxx, and another made in Japan at a higher price? I'm not saying I won't buy one made in China, but I am saying that I would pay more for one that was made in Japan. |
|
Quoted: That’s a good way of looking at this! I know about the work Ed has put into this and I fell I love with the reticle years ago but the lower FOV and no lifetime warranty option on the 1-6x kept me looking. I ended up with a lightweight Leupold VX-6 with the CMR2 reticle but now seeing Ed’s 1-10x scope I am considering a switch. I ordered a 1-10x from the same manufacturer to pair with my .224 Valkyrie upper. A BDC reticle won’t fit the ballistics of the .224 so I feel the mil reticle is better for me in that application. The good news is the scope arrived yesterday after handling it I think there may be a lightly used VX-6 in the exchange soon. Quality looks great and looking forward to side by side comparison. Also, for anyone else considering the GCRS, LaRue had a really smoking deal on their new mount with 35mm option. About $100 less then the current model. I take it you like it quite a bit so far? Enough to sell off your Leupy? Please give us an update when you have checked it out more. Thanks |
AR Sponsor