Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
6/25/2018 7:04:05 PM
Posted: 7/9/2018 3:37:15 AM EDT
Looking for a 1 X 6 or 1 X 8 scope for a .308 AR. Will be used for plinking, target shooting & occasional 2 Gun competition. Prices are all over the place, $300 to $2000. Should I go entry level and get a Primary Arms or right to a Trijicon?
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 7:42:12 AM EDT
Primary Arms 1-8xPlatinum.
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 8:46:40 AM EDT
It's all about what you can afford. If you can afford a $2000 scope than buy one. It is always suggested to spend as much as you can on scopes. So in order for us to help you let's start with how much do you want to spend?
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 9:34:53 AM EDT
Get the best you can afford, realizing the of law diminishing returns is real.
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 9:56:52 AM EDT
If you go 1x8 i would spend some money. PA platinum or burris XTR 2 would be my baseline if you want something decent. You can spend a little less on a 1x6 and still get a decent scope like the Burris RT6 or primary arms offerings
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 10:10:29 AM EDT
8x is getting into enough magnification to make precision shots at 500-600 yards.

6x bridges the gap between a basic 4x magnification, which is great for general purpose shooting out to those ranges, and 8x, which allows precision.

Unless you need the extra magnification for the increased precision it offers, 6x is as high as I would go in a general purpose rifle. I would leave 8x for a DMR type rifle.
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 10:26:27 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Marine6680:
8x is getting into enough magnification to make precision shots at 500-600 yards.

6x bridges the gap between a basic 4x magnification, which is great for general purpose shooting out to those ranges, and 8x, which allows precision.


Unless you need the extra magnification for the increased precision it offers, 6x is as high as I would go in a general purpose rifle. I would leave 8x for a DMR type rifle.
View Quote

1X8 allows for an additional 2X if needed while doing everything a 1x6 can do.

I'm not seeing the benefit of 1X6 over 1X8 with the exception of possibly weight.
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 10:54:33 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M4:
1X8 allows for an additional 2X if needed while doing everything a 1x6 can do.

I'm not seeing the benefit of 1X6 over 1X8 with the exception of possibly weight.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M4:
Originally Posted By Marine6680:
8x is getting into enough magnification to make precision shots at 500-600 yards.

6x bridges the gap between a basic 4x magnification, which is great for general purpose shooting out to those ranges, and 8x, which allows precision.

Unless you need the extra magnification for the increased precision it offers, 6x is as high as I would go in a general purpose rifle. I would leave 8x for a DMR type rifle.
1X8 allows for an additional 2X if needed while doing everything a 1x6 can do.

I'm not seeing the benefit of 1X6 over 1X8 with the exception of possibly weight.
Weight may be the only general advantage of a 1-6x. In a 5.56 I’d say 6x is good but a .308 can reach out a bit better; 8x would be useful.
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 11:22:15 AM EDT
The difference between 6 vs 8 is less important to me than the quality of the glass. A Razor on 6X will do better than some Chinese bullshit at 8X.
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 1:37:21 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Alaskanforfreedom:
It's all about what you can afford. If you can afford a $2000 scope than buy one. It is always suggested to spend as much as you can on scopes. So in order for us to help you let's start with how much do you want to spend?
View Quote
$500.00 give or take.....
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 2:21:49 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By doty_soty:
The difference between 6 vs 8 is less important to me than the quality of the glass. A Razor on 6X will do better than some Chinese bullshit at 8X.
View Quote
Noted....
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 2:53:47 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Joker1713:
Primary Arms 1-8xPlatinum.
View Quote
Price sure seems reasonable on the PA Platinum.....
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 3:05:23 PM EDT
I'd rather get a better 1 X 6 than a cheaper 1 X 8.....
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 5:22:35 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Joker1713:
Primary Arms 1-8xPlatinum.
View Quote
This is my suggestion for a competition optic or a practical gun. The reticle on the Trijicon is a smudge better for precision, I think. I run PA Platinums on my race guns.

That being said, my first choice for a practical rifle is a quality 1-6, like the Razor. A 1-8x just has too many compromises for a practical rifle. It works in a competitive setting, however.

Don't even consider a shitty Chinese made 1-8x.
Link Posted: 7/9/2018 9:43:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/9/2018 9:49:23 PM EDT by Marine6680]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M4:

1X8 allows for an additional 2X if needed while doing everything a 1x6 can do.

I'm not seeing the benefit of 1X6 over 1X8 with the exception of possibly weight.
View Quote
Weight and size are big factors...

But there is also a thing called... Too much magnification.

It slows you down when making shots. For most people, they are better served with lower magnification, enough to boost confidence in the shot and help precision, but not so much that is actually reduces shot confidence and slows them down.

A combat optic is about speed, unless you are talking sniper roles.

If the OP's budget is $500, the PA 1-6x Raptor is good.

Clarity of the glass is important as well. A good and clear 6x is better than a distorted 8x. Go for the best quality you can get for your money, not the most magnification... A very good 4x is better than an OK 6x any day.

If I ever get another LPV it will be a Mk6 1-6x Leupold... Those are very nicely made, and I like the glass and the reticle.
Link Posted: 7/10/2018 12:35:47 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Marine6680:

Weight and size are big factors...

But there is also a thing called... Too much magnification.

It slows you down when making shots. For most people, they are better served with lower magnification, enough to boost confidence in the shot and help precision, but not so much that is actually reduces shot confidence and slows them down.

A combat optic is about speed, unless you are talking sniper roles.

If the OP's budget is $500, the PA 1-6x Raptor is good.

Clarity of the glass is important as well. A good and clear 6x is better than a distorted 8x. Go for the best quality you can get for your money, not the most magnification... A very good 4x is better than an OK 6x any day.

If I ever get another LPV it will be a Mk6 1-6x Leupold... Those are very nicely made, and I like the glass and the reticle.
View Quote
I might wait a little longer Marine6680 and increase the budget. I'm pretty certain on a 1 X 6. I have no idea on a mount yet. A Trijicon TR25 looks like a good choice. Leopold or Bushnell maybe......I have an ACOG so I'm leaning on Trijicon but not too stubborn to consider others.....
Link Posted: 7/10/2018 3:13:27 AM EDT
DSG has the Steiner P4Xi with throw lever for $429 if you sign in.

Pretty much destroys anything else near its price range.
Link Posted: 7/11/2018 12:26:11 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Marine6680:

Weight and size are big factors...

But there is also a thing called... Too much magnification.

It slows you down when making shots. For most people, they are better served with lower magnification, enough to boost confidence in the shot and help precision, but not so much that is actually reduces shot confidence and slows them down.

A combat optic is about speed, unless you are talking sniper roles.

If the OP's budget is $500, the PA 1-6x Raptor is good.

Clarity of the glass is important as well. A good and clear 6x is better than a distorted 8x. Go for the best quality you can get for your money, not the most magnification... A very good 4x is better than an OK 6x any day.

If I ever get another LPV it will be a Mk6 1-6x Leupold... Those are very nicely made, and I like the glass and the reticle.
View Quote
There is nothing stopping you or anyone from using a 1-8x scope on 6x.

And the Nightforce NX8 is pretty darn small and light weight for what it does.
Link Posted: 7/11/2018 12:47:34 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Brucea4:
$500.00 give or take.....
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Brucea4:
Originally Posted By Alaskanforfreedom:
It's all about what you can afford. If you can afford a $2000 scope than buy one. It is always suggested to spend as much as you can on scopes. So in order for us to help you let's start with how much do you want to spend?
$500.00 give or take.....
PST gen2 is the cheapest 1-6x optic I would recommend.
Link Posted: 7/11/2018 1:15:02 AM EDT
way more to those scopes than just top end mag
Make sure to compare the other characteristics too, like exit pupils, reticle, glass origin/quality etc.

Actually, I'd argue that reticle and exit pupil are more important than top end mag
Link Posted: 7/11/2018 7:29:05 AM EDT
I like sfp 1-6, set to either 1x or 6x. If you get a ffp 1x gets slow, for me anyway. The dot is too small. On a sfp you have to be zoomed in all the way for the reticle to work, the trade off for a big easy to see horseshoe / dot. The eyebox gets smaller for a 1-8 vs the 1-6.

Some day they will get a budget minded dual focal plane and I will buy lots of them.
Link Posted: 7/12/2018 8:55:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/12/2018 8:59:04 AM EDT by 9divdoc]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Brucea4:
I'd rather get a better 1 X 6 than a cheaper 1 X 8.....
View Quote
This.

The prices on Vortex 1-6 Razors have come down quite a bit...I'd look there.
Link Posted: 7/12/2018 11:40:37 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 9divdoc:
This.

The prices on Vortex 1-6 Razors have come down quite a bit...I'd look there.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 9divdoc:
Originally Posted By Brucea4:
I'd rather get a better 1 X 6 than a cheaper 1 X 8.....
This.

The prices on Vortex 1-6 Razors have come down quite a bit...I'd look there.
I’m very happy with my Gen II w/ JM-1 reticule.
Link Posted: 7/12/2018 12:57:27 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/12/2018 1:50:17 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By PA_Mike:

Having almost three years of access to the entire Primary Arms optics lineup and having shot seriously for more than fifteen years, I'm very inclined to agree with this statement.

At SHOT Show range day this year we had over 100 shooters visit our shooting lane, and every single one of them managed to connect at 500 yards, with a 5-10mph wind pushing left to right. Many of these folks had never shot a rifle past 100 yards in their life.

We had a 1-8x Platinum, a 1-6x Raptor FFP, and a 4x ACOG with the ACSS reticle. The ACOG and Raptor were about on equal footing for the 500 yard shots, and the 1-8x Platinum made it super easy due to the extra magnification combined with it's great glass (on par with the ACOG in my humble industry-shill opinion).

Whether it's up close or at 500 yards, I would rather take that shot with a quality 1-6x or even a fixed 4x with a great eyebox and exit pupil, rather than say, ye olde blister pack Walmart 3-9x40 hunting scope. The cheapy 3-9x has more total magnification than any of the scopes we brought to range day, but you guys know that it's maddeningly frustrating to use in real life. That's an extreme example, but I think the overall principle holds up.

Magnification is a nice bonus but is NO substitute for clarity and fast acquisition, whether you are at 10 yards or 1000 yards.
View Quote
Just to piggy back on this from my own personal experience. I got to go shooting with a guy once that was just really getting in to long range. He lased a spot in the woods at 864yds. He drove, brought his .300win mag and I brought two guns: an AR and a friend's Vietnam era M40 clone, complete with original redfield scope.
I wanted to shoot the .308 at that kind of distance, plus my AR only had a 1.5-5 on it. I found that with 168gr OTM ammo I was getting out there, but the redfield had just a plain reticle and there was nothing for me to hold on, and the caps were practically fused stuck and it wasn't my rifle so I didn't want to touch his zero. I ended up having to hold on arbitrary things in the target background for refernce, i.e. "hold on little twig on branch 10ft up and 3ft right" that kind of thing.
After I ran out of 168gr the 150 was going sub-sonic by the time it got there and was worthless so I was just watching him shoot through the 3-9 redfield. Then I pulled out the AR and he let me borrow some 77gr mk262 stuff. I full anticipated being nowhere on target, but even the rather spartan SPR reticle in the Leupold 1.5-5 Mk4 helped me get a POA/POI reference and eventually I walked in some shots and got some hits.
What I walked away with from that relatively brief experience was that as Mike pointed out, reticle can make a much bigger difference than total magnification.
Link Posted: 7/12/2018 4:48:54 PM EDT
With a 308 I would go Trijicon 1-8 accupower or TR25. If you get a primary arms just go ahead and get the platinum. I rather have a durable solid scope that can take the 308 recoil
Link Posted: 7/12/2018 4:49:51 PM EDT
With a 308 I would go Trijicon 1-8 accupower or TR25. If you get a primary arms just go ahead and get the platinum. I rather have a durable solid scope that can take the 308 recoil
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 12:08:18 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AKSU:
I’m very happy with my Gen II w/ JM-1 reticule.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AKSU:
Originally Posted By 9divdoc:
Originally Posted By Brucea4:
I'd rather get a better 1 X 6 than a cheaper 1 X 8.....
This.

The prices on Vortex 1-6 Razors have come down quite a bit...I'd look there.
I’m very happy with my Gen II w/ JM-1 reticule.
Ditto. But you won't find one for $500.

For $500 I would take the Steiner P4Xi even though it is a 1-4 and the OP is considering the 1-6 and 1-8.

I haven't looked through the offerings from Primary Arms so I can't really comment. I was very impressed by the glass of the P4Xi's that I have been able to lay hands on.
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 12:13:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/13/2018 12:17:33 AM EDT by Vespid_Wasp]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By sevin8nin:

Just to piggy back on this from my own personal experience. I got to go shooting with a guy once that was just really getting in to long range. He lased a spot in the woods at 864yds. He drove, brought his .300win mag and I brought two guns: an AR and a friend's Vietnam era M40 clone, complete with original redfield scope.
I wanted to shoot the .308 at that kind of distance, plus my AR only had a 1.5-5 on it. I found that with 168gr OTM ammo I was getting out there, but the redfield had just a plain reticle and there was nothing for me to hold on, and the caps were practically fused stuck and it wasn't my rifle so I didn't want to touch his zero. I ended up having to hold on arbitrary things in the target background for refernce, i.e. "hold on little twig on branch 10ft up and 3ft right" that kind of thing.
After I ran out of 168gr the 150 was going sub-sonic by the time it got there and was worthless so I was just watching him shoot through the 3-9 redfield. Then I pulled out the AR and he let me borrow some 77gr mk262 stuff. I full anticipated being nowhere on target, but even the rather spartan SPR reticle in the Leupold 1.5-5 Mk4 helped me get a POA/POI reference and eventually I walked in some shots and got some hits.
What I walked away with from that relatively brief experience was that as Mike pointed out, reticle can make a much bigger difference than total magnification.
View Quote
Reticle is a huge part of the criteria for me in choosing a scope.

I don't own one, but the ACSS is tremendously well thought out.

Likewise the JM1 in my Razor is just about perfect for quick and dirty shooting on reasonably sized targets out to 600 yards. (Needs wind holds for a 10mph crosswind and it would be better.)
The ACSS has those wind holds.

If I were building my perfect optic for 3 gun it would have elements of both the JM1 and the ACSS.
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 12:40:00 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 12:45:02 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M4:
1X8 allows for an additional 2X if needed while doing everything a 1x6 can do.

I'm not seeing the benefit of 1X6 over 1X8 with the exception of possibly weight.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By M4:
Originally Posted By Marine6680:
8x is getting into enough magnification to make precision shots at 500-600 yards.

6x bridges the gap between a basic 4x magnification, which is great for general purpose shooting out to those ranges, and 8x, which allows precision.

Unless you need the extra magnification for the increased precision it offers, 6x is as high as I would go in a general purpose rifle. I would leave 8x for a DMR type rifle.
1X8 allows for an additional 2X if needed while doing everything a 1x6 can do.

I'm not seeing the benefit of 1X6 over 1X8 with the exception of possibly weight.
A 1x8 cannot do everything a 1x6 can do - because of second focal plane. When using a reticle - you can only realistically range at a specific power - most commonly the highest power.

This is mostly a challenge in high speed competition use - where you want your reticle set at a lower magnification for increase field of view, but want to quickly engage near and far targets, and leverage a BDC or ranging reticle, and do not want to have to switch magnifications during the stage.
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 12:48:01 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By doty_soty:
The difference between 6 vs 8 is less important to me than the quality of the glass. A Razor on 6X will do better than some Chinese bullshit at 8X.
View Quote
This.

Look at a 600yd, 2MOA target (12") through a Razor at 6x, and then a cheap chinese 8x, and get back to us.

I was shooting with a friend who had a budget Vortex 12x scope, and I was shooting my Razor 6x.... and when I looked through his - I could hardly believe how bad the 600 and 800 yard targets looked. They were just fuzzy white blurs. You could still get hits... but seeing your splash, impacts, and having any sense of clear lines were out the window.
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 1:01:35 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 2:35:29 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By PA_Mike:
Yeah but who said anything about second focal plane being the only option?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By PA_Mike:
Originally Posted By FALARAK:

A 1x8 cannot do everything a 1x6 can do - because of second focal plane. When using a reticle - you can only realistically range at a specific power - most commonly the highest power.

This is mostly a challenge in high speed competition use - where you want your reticle set at a lower magnification for increase field of view, but want to quickly engage near and far targets, and leverage a BDC or ranging reticle, and do not want to have to switch magnifications during the stage.
Yeah but who said anything about second focal plane being the only option?
The price difference for anything you can trust is huge. The options and reticles are also greatly reduced.

The useability of the reticle is also called into question... many FFP scopes the reticle is only useful at the highest (or very near) setting.

Everything is a tradeoff. I am simply saying when comparing what was stated (1-6 vs 1-8) there are things that 1-6x scopes can actually do better. This is the reason you see more 1-6x SFP scopes in 3-gun competition.... because of the limitations of the reticle in FFP scopes, and too much magnification to be useful in 1-8x SFP scopes.
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 3:50:07 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FALARAK:

The price difference for anything you can trust is huge. The options and reticles are also greatly reduced.

The useability of the reticle is also called into question... many FFP scopes the reticle is only useful at the highest (or very near) setting.

Everything is a tradeoff. I am simply saying when comparing what was stated (1-6 vs 1-8) there are things that 1-6x scopes can actually do better. This is the reason you see more 1-6x SFP scopes in 3-gun competition.... because of the limitations of the reticle in FFP scopes, and too much magnification to be useful in 1-8x SFP scopes.
View Quote
A poorly designed FFP reticle will have some of your noted problems. However, an optimized FFP reticle such as in some USO, PA, and some Eotech LPV models etc. leave virtually no advantage to an SFP.

Regarding the 3 gun scopes, you see more 1-6 SFP in 3 gun because of all the vortex sponsorships.
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 5:32:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/13/2018 5:37:48 PM EDT by FALARAK]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BarrettBoy:
Regarding the 3 gun scopes, you see more 1-6 SFP in 3 gun because of all the vortex sponsorships.
View Quote
Sorry, but that statement demonstrates your knowledge on that topic.

This was a true statement before Vortex even made one. The majority used LPV SFP 1-4x, until the Swarovski set the standard.

Vortex became super popular because the Vortex Razor HD Gen2 with JM-1 is just about the perfect 3-gun scope for the type of shooting you do. (red-dot fast, huge eyebox, BDC reticle, excellent clarity)

It was just about everything the Swaro scope had (which was the king of the hill) for half the price. THAT's why you see so many.

That said - there are TONS of competitors that use Leupold, Kahles, Swarovski, Burris, and others.

If there was a scope that gave an advantage - competitors would use it.
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 5:53:08 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 7:23:43 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BarrettBoy:

A poorly designed FFP reticle will have some of your noted problems. However, an optimized FFP reticle such as in some USO, PA, and some Eotech LPV models etc. leave virtually no advantage to an SFP.

Regarding the 3 gun scopes, you see more 1-6 SFP in 3 gun because of all the vortex sponsorships.
View Quote
Not true. Most of those razors are bought.

How many people do you really think are getting free optics?
Link Posted: 7/13/2018 10:27:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/13/2018 10:29:15 PM EDT by Sniper3142]
Might be out of the OP's price range, but...



Not the best reticle for precision, but for hitting minute of man (or animal) sized targets out to 600+ yards, its pretty darn good.

" The NX8 1-8x24 F1 is a class leading, compact and lightweight riflescope optimized for short to mid-range shooting. At only 8.75“ in length and 17 ounces, this riflescope adds minimal size and weight but delivers superior optics and trusted Nightforce performance to any rifle."
View Quote
Link Posted: 7/14/2018 8:12:16 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FALARAK:
Sorry, but that statement demonstrates your knowledge on that topic.

This was a true statement before Vortex even made one. The majority used LPV SFP 1-4x, until the Swarovski set the standard.

Vortex became super popular because the Vortex Razor HD Gen2 with JM-1 is just about the perfect 3-gun scope for the type of shooting you do. (red-dot fast, huge eyebox, BDC reticle, excellent clarity)

It was just about everything the Swaro scope had (which was the king of the hill) for half the price. THAT's why you see so many.

That said - there are TONS of competitors that use Leupold, Kahles, Swarovski, Burris, and others.

If there was a scope that gave an advantage - competitors would use it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FALARAK:
Originally Posted By BarrettBoy:
Regarding the 3 gun scopes, you see more 1-6 SFP in 3 gun because of all the vortex sponsorships.
Sorry, but that statement demonstrates your knowledge on that topic.

This was a true statement before Vortex even made one. The majority used LPV SFP 1-4x, until the Swarovski set the standard.

Vortex became super popular because the Vortex Razor HD Gen2 with JM-1 is just about the perfect 3-gun scope for the type of shooting you do. (red-dot fast, huge eyebox, BDC reticle, excellent clarity)

It was just about everything the Swaro scope had (which was the king of the hill) for half the price. THAT's why you see so many.

That said - there are TONS of competitors that use Leupold, Kahles, Swarovski, Burris, and others.

If there was a scope that gave an advantage - competitors would use it.
Agreed, Swarovski and Kahles are still king(s) of the hill for the whole package of illumination, eye box, etc., but the Vortex is pretty close for 50-60% of the cost.

The only higher-end FFP I own is the Mark 6, and I do not feel it is as well suited to the sport as the better 1-6s.
Top Top