Posted: 11/9/2020 2:57:19 PM EDT
|
I have a Marlin 1894 CSBL .357 Lever action. I want to mount a nice quick-acquisition optic on top, the PA advanced microdot seems like it should work fine and recoil won't kill it. So I buy one. Then I read about how the new generation of Cyclops Prismatic has different bases now, and can be put into a 1.05" low mount. I already have one cyclops, but it's on an AR of mine that lives out of state. The Cyclops eyebox is said to be 4". From what I remember of the Gen 1, it seemed to be a bit more generous than that, but I could be remembering incorrectly. So the website says the Cyclops has a 4" eyebox. I am wondering if it still has a useful RDS-level eyebox at almost double that, about 7". Pictures for reference: Where my PA microdot sits now, vs. where my eye is when on the stock (approximately). The optic sits this far forward because of convenience and because it doesn't matter.  Reinforcing where my eye falls on the stock. The integrated rear peep falls at about the 7" mark:  Measuring 4" back from the peep would set my face way farther forward than is comfortable, if this is indeed the limit of the prismatic eyebox.  I know that on my ARs, I run the stock locked so that the front of the stock is about where the reinforcement for the buffer tube begins to protrude. I don't know what that correlates to in LOP, vs. this lever action. Would anyone with a current generation of cyclops possibly be able to get some rough measurements for me to see if that optic would still be open/useful/usable at an approximate 7" eyebox? TIA ETA: it works quite well enough for me, I'll get pictures in the next couple days. |
|
Quoted: Yes you would be OK but you do start seeing a little reduced field of view.  ); there is the beginnings of a triangular reduction in the field of vision (as opposed to the usual black circle, that starts a little farther out).Looks like I'll be buying another PA optic. I am amazed that pushing this optic beyond it's admitted design window, that it can still be a subjectively useful choice on the market. |
|
Quoted: First I've heard of this, but I'm not exactly on the bleeding edge. any ETA, idea of changes, or price? It was to have been a SHOT show introduction. Pricing and more detail is coming in a few weeks but some info here https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/Let-s-discuss-the-anticipated-Primary-Arms-SLx-1x-optic-/18-759888/ |
|
Quoted: It was to have been a SHOT show introduction. Pricing and more detail is coming in a few weeks but some info here https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/Let-s-discuss-the-anticipated-Primary-Arms-SLx-1x-optic-/18-759888/ Will the existing design continue to be sold, or get in a shipment or two here and there? ETA: bought a green cyclops off the EE. |
I finally got everything together, and the PA prismatic works quite well (for me) on my 1894, despite being well outside the published eyebox specifications. And the Green is  . I'm a happy camper  I'll post up some pictures after I get a chance to take some good ones (which might be a day or two, family looks a me funny when I try to get pictures of any equipment  ).
|
 As promised. On the LaRue LT661 mount, it BARELY clears the rear iron, but it clears. That allows me to set it a couple slots farther back than the original guesstimates in my OP. And the ACSS reticle ought to work well for the varied accuracy between .38 special and .357 loads. |
|
Quoted: This is excellent. I have mentally toyed with the same idea. How is the weight and balance with the 1X in place? I have the same setup with Holosun circle dot but astigmatism causes flaring. I am likely going to try a new micro 1X from PA when they are out Note that the Larue mount cross bolt sets the optic father rearward than the factory PA mount. Also remember that I am using this optic well outside it's intended design parameters; worth remembering if you go the same route and it doesn't work for you. Obviously can't testify to the next generation PA prismatic, but my eyes haven't had the greatest of luck with micro prismatic optics, and had especially headache-inducing properties with the MRO. I don't have an astigmatism, but apparently my eyes are a bit sensitive in some regards. Don't know if the next Gen will be as forgiving on the eyebox, either.Scooting it this far outside of its design range really makes me appreciate it when it's on ARs, thoughsuper wide FOV and great clarity. |