AR Sponsor
Posted: 9/15/2024 2:05:57 PM EDT
|
I have quite a stable of 1x(ish) optics (not traditional red dots or holographic dots) and decided to go to the range and run some controlled drills to see which one *I* was fastest with. I was fortunate to have just ordered and received the new Primary Arms GLx 1x so that was included. BLUF: I was slowest with the new PA GLx 1x and the reticle is what matters most.  Here are the optics I used in this range session -- Holosun AEMS-GR -- Holosun HE510C-GR -- Primary Arms GLx 1x (green) -- Primary Arms GLx 2x (red) -- Primary Arms SLx 1x (green) Gun is a CMMG Banshee 8" (15" barrel cut down) with MEAN PMAG inserts. Prior to starting, I had about 200 rounds with this setup. I ended up shooting about 250 rounds with this testing.   Since I had just received the new GLx 1x and not sighted it in, I took some time to do that first. And because my RO was new, we ran through a few warmup strings to get acquainted. This was all done with the new GLx 1x and since it was already mounted, I started with that optic for testing. Note that all these optics are either circle-dot or the Cyclops-chevron reticles. Because of a recent thread discussing circle-dot effectiveness, I re-ran one of the Holosun optics with just the 2 MOA dot. BINGO! It was really the dot reticle that made the most difference versus any particular optic!  Testing methodology: -- I ran the same string for all runs. -- I ran 3 strings for each optic and averaged the results. -- I threw away any string when I had a malfunction (I had 5 strings with FTEs) -- A string was four targets; 2 rounds per target. -- I used a 2 target array to the left and a 2 target array to the right. Engagement was "slicing the pie". -- From the start position, it was 2 steps to see the first target in either direction. -- All strings were started with engagement to the left target array (my offhand). -- Left array (as you see them) was a 10yd target, then a 3yd target. -- Right array (as you see them) was a 3yd target, then a 15yd target. -- I am totally open to any criticism of my testing methodology. Totally. Thoughts: -- I am just a regular user/consumer. I have zero qualifications within the shooting or optics industry. This review is just my personal opinions and observations. -- I was definitely surprised at how slow I was with the new GLx 1x. I did some warmup drills so I shouldn't have been too cold. Although my (lack of) points down demonstrate I was being more deliberate with my shots. Additionally, as the testing went on, my old broken body tiring out should have leveled the playing field. I don't know and I'm not going to go repeat this with a different order. -- I'm a little surprised at how far off I was (raw and adjusted) with the AEMS circle-dot versus all the other 1x times (excepting the GLx). And then to turn around and have my best times with the AEMS 2 MOA dot. I had planned on shooting the 510 as the dot only, but the reticle brightness was down and I felt that would have been a negative. -- It really looks like the idea that a circle-dot being slower than a plain dot has definite merit in my case. This is putting me in a conundrum because I was hoping to settle on the PA microprism with the etched reticle (etched reticle acts as backup). -- I see C_DOES dropped his evaluation of the new GLx 1x. I wrote this up prior to watching that so that I wouldn't be subconsciously biased. That's it for now. Thanks for reading all the way through! Don't forget hit that Like & Subscribe and Ring That Bell! |
|
Quoted: Thanks. Looking around for replacements, looks like that was where I was gravitating. Not seeing a green reticle though, which I prefer. Mounts for this? It doesn’t really matter if you prefer green over red. On the clock they will run the same. I use a 1.57” Scalarworks. |
|
Quoted: It doesn't really matter if you prefer green over red. On the clock they will run the same. Quoted: It doesn't really matter if you prefer green over red. On the clock they will run the same. Making me re-think how I'm using my optics across the board. Quoted: Great write up. Thanks for doing all this.  |
|
Without question, there were several variables that "influenced" my performance as I ran through all the tests. Really wish there was a reliable way to control for those things. I guess that's why YouTubers seem to focus on purely objective measurements when comparing, rather than going down a rabbit hole of seemingly subjective comparison criteria. |
|
Quoted: Without question, there were several variables that "influenced" my performance as I ran through all the tests. Really wish there was a reliable way to control for those things. I guess that's why YouTubers seem to focus on purely objective measurements when comparing, rather than going down a rabbit hole of seemingly subjective comparison criteria. You could trim the movement out of it and choose the stand and shoot without reload drills like Accelerator. Also, I can't tell but I think you have a wide transition in your drill and that would work too. |
|
Quoted: That is definitely helpful, thanks.  Thank you for the effort and report. In your chart, what is "Point Down" and what is its significance to the final ratings? It looks like the Point Down is added to the Final Split for each string and then this Total is averaged for each optic to get Total Average. I understand the RAW Average but trying to understand the significance of Total Average. Sorry if this a dumb question. I have never shot this drill so it is hard for me to wrap my head around it. |
|
Repetition matters a lot. When I was first issued an ACOG/RCO, I wasn’t a fan when doing table 3 and 4 drills using an RCO. After training and doing the drills on a consistent basis, I got a lot better with the RCO at close distances. The same goes for any optic and drills associated. You have to do the same drills several times with the same setup to increase speed and lethality. You will have a better control group to compare to at that point. To this day, I still do not like chevron reticles. At speed, picking up the very tip of a chevron is not as practice as a dot of whatever MOA size. To me, 100 yards and in, Aimpoint T2 will always be king. |
|
Quoted: Thank you for the effort and report. In your chart, what is "Point Down" and what is its significance to the final ratings? It looks like the Point Down is added to the Final Split for each string and then this Total is averaged for each optic to get Total Average. I understand the RAW Average but trying to understand the significance of Total Average. Sorry if this a dumb question. I have never shot this drill so it is hard for me to wrap my head around it. So columns D, E & F represent the raw time and columns H & I represent the times adjusted for the hit factor. You can be fast but not accurate and this scoring system accounts for that. It's actually a good question.  |
|
Quoted: I was shooting IDPA targets. There are three scoring zones (four actually). 0, -1 & -3. (a complete miss is -5). The points equate to seconds and get added to the score. So a total of two -1 zone hits across 4 targets gets 2 seconds added to the total time. So columns D, E & F represent the raw time and columns H & I represent the times adjusted for the hit factor. You can be fast but not accurate and this scoring system accounts for that. It's actually a good question. https://blogcdn.targetbarn.com/broad-side/media/idpascoring.jpg Thank you! Now it all makes sense to me. I really appreciate your effort in making this evaluation. |
|
I think quality-wise, it's as good as anything in their microprism line. I've owned the 1x, 2x, 3x & 5x models. Comparing the glass (I'm no expert), it was better than the SLx 1x and possibly a tick better than the GLx 2x. The 2x is an older optic, so I don't know what role (if any) age plays in to this. Despite the large difference in the 1x scores between the SLx & GLx, I would say they are both comparable. As 45-Seventy pointed out, once you are on the clock, these minor differences disappear. |
|
Quoted: Thanks, I have the SLx1 and the GLx2 as well. You think the GLx1 be worth the 300+ to change from the others and or may have to wait for some kind of sale. Personally, size and weight are going to have me heavily prefer the SLx over the GLx. Without getting too deep in the minutiae, there really isn't much difference between the two, including price/availability, if your decision is a 1x microprism. Full disclosure, I'm getting rid of all my PA microprisms and Holosun circle-dots for (larger) plain dots. Except... I'm keeping a GLx 2x 300BO BDC simply because they're no longer available and I think it's a good fit for my 300 HAM'R. And a GLx 2x 5.56 BDC on my 6933 (which isn't a primary SD/HD weapon). |
|
Based on 45-Seventy's feedback, I got a DeltaPoint Pro 6MOA with a DLOC mount. This setup is on my 300BO HD gun. Wow, this setup just seems so obvious and natural. And next to no weight. For HD purposes, it seems ideal. Wish I knew what height this mount is because it's perfect (for me). Still waiting on my SRO for my PCC. Will be using the LT QD mount. Can't wait to get to the range and shoot this setup.  |
AR Sponsor