What would you like to see next from Primary Arms optics? (Page 22 of 22)
|
Originally Posted By SoVa: The 2.5-20 in the platinum line and non chevron reticles that were announced at shot show have been my biggest ask the last couple years so if they would just get those available I’d be pretty happy. Hoping to see the non chevron reticles carry over to the GLx update as well. As far as new stuff goes I’d like a 1&4 like an Elcan with a nova reticle. Nova reticles in all the prisms. Compact 1-4 in the GLX line. Would a Nova reticle, since it's wire, have a reduced forward visible signature compared to the existing ACSS micro prism sights? That's like my one gripe about those things. But it is not unique to PA. Everybody seems to have the same issue, from what I can tell. |
|
Originally Posted By SpyHawk: Would a Nova reticle, since it's wire, have a reduced forward visible signature compared to the existing ACSS micro prism sights? That's like my one gripe about those things. But it is not unique to PA. Everybody seems to have the same issue, from what I can tell. Hadn’t thought of that. Also didn’t necessarily think about the actual fiber wire illumination, just the reticle format being a simple mil hash with an illuminated center point but it would be a small illuminated dot as opposed to the huge horseshoe so it should reduce the forward signature. |
|
Originally Posted By SpyHawk: Would a Nova reticle, since it's wire, have a reduced forward visible signature compared to the existing ACSS micro prism sights? That's like my one gripe about those things. But it is not unique to PA. Everybody seems to have the same issue, from what I can tell. Yes the Nova Reticle emmits much less light through the objective lens. I just went into a dark room with a 1-6 Nova and the GLX 2X Prism, and the Prism throws a lot more light forward than the 1-6 Nova! |
This is...a clue - Pat_Rogers
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo
CO, MI, OR - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo
CO, MI, OR - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders
|
Originally Posted By cone256: The refreshed GLx 2-10 would be nice We are working on several updated models. We will post about them as soon as they are ready. |
|
Originally Posted By PrimaryArms: We are working on several updated models. We will post about them as soon as they are ready. At the mention of the GLx 2.5-10 I have to repost my thoughts as this is my favorite optic. I would love to see an update or a PLx version of the GLx 2.5-10x44. This scope is as close as it comes to perfect for me on a General Purpose Rifle, or a Jack of all Trades, but there are a few things I think would make a considerable change. Now my changes would be in order for the scope to better fit the role of a General Purpose Optic which today, for the most part, seems to be a 1-8, 1-10, with an offset dot. Many would say a 2x low-end would not fill that role but when everyone runs some type of offset dot, the 2x low-end really doesn't impact shooting abilities at close range where you would use the offset dot anyways. So to me, the 1x on most LPVOs is repetitive since the use of the offset dot fills that role. The first would be making it a tad lighter and smaller. This would be accomplished in my mind by reducing the objective lens to 32mm or something similar and removing the locking exposed windage to be replaced with what essentially is on the new PLx 1-8. The current scope is a bit long and the weight is honestly fine with it being right at 22.5oz. If it weighed less and was shorter in length, it would compete even better against high-end LPVOs that fill the GPO role like the Razor gen 3 or the ATACR 1-8 because it would weigh less than both those options as well as having a larger objective lens providing better light gathering at the top end magnification. Now since my goal is a general-purpose optic, both exposed turrets are a bit repetitive and I personally never use the widage because the reticle is perfect for holding. Keep the top one as locking exposed but cap the windage knob. Also, keep the locking mechanism the same; it's the best hands down. My next change would be to reduce the profile of the parallax/illumination knob as in the current iteration it sticks out pretty far and I find it catching on my kit. Now it has never rotated off of my previous settings but it is a slight annoyance sticking so far off the side of my rifle. Change the magnification ring to accept the same levers that are on the new PLx 1-8. Add thick dark black lines at 3, 6, and 9 o'clock like on the Nightforce DMx reticle to help draw the eye to the center of the reticle at low magnifications. On the reticle, make it more like the Nightforce DMx and not like the Leupold CMR as the CMR lacks some critical aiming points in it's attempt as staying simple. Ideally, make the chevron smaller or go to a traditional reticle center. Finally, keep the magnification as 2-10 as 2x low end is perfect for most engagements from 30-100yds and the top end at 10x to help maintain weight/clarity, but also because a lot of rifle competitions like the gasgun show limit the top end to 10x for various divisions. I believe that with these changes this, let's call "PLx 2-10x32mm FFP" would dominate most 13.7-18" barreled rifles where the goal was a sort of General Purpose Rifle that can do just about anything. If the form factor and weight were better or closer to what most consider to be the best LPVOs available today, with the abilities of parallax adjustment and badass reticle, would make it an easy choice for many. |
|
Originally Posted By HotelBravo: At the mention of the GLx 2.5-10 I have to repost my thoughts as this is my favorite optic. I would love to see an update or a PLx version of the GLx 2.5-10x44. This scope is as close as it comes to perfect for me on a General Purpose Rifle, or a Jack of all Trades, but there are a few things I think would make a considerable change. Now my changes would be in order for the scope to better fit the role of a General Purpose Optic which today, for the most part, seems to be a 1-8, 1-10, with an offset dot. Many would say a 2x low-end would not fill that role but when everyone runs some type of offset dot, the 2x low-end really doesn't impact shooting abilities at close range where you would use the offset dot anyways. So to me, the 1x on most LPVOs is repetitive since the use of the offset dot fills that role. The first would be making it a tad lighter and smaller. This would be accomplished in my mind by reducing the objective lens to 32mm or something similar and removing the locking exposed windage to be replaced with what essentially is on the new PLx 1-8. The current scope is a bit long and the weight is honestly fine with it being right at 22.5oz. If it weighed less and was shorter in length, it would compete even better against high-end LPVOs that fill the GPO role like the Razor gen 3 or the ATACR 1-8 because it would weigh less than both those options as well as having a larger objective lens providing better light gathering at the top end magnification. Now since my goal is a general-purpose optic, both exposed turrets are a bit repetitive and I personally never use the widage because the reticle is perfect for holding. Keep the top one as locking exposed but cap the windage knob. Also, keep the locking mechanism the same; it's the best hands down. My next change would be to reduce the profile of the parallax/illumination knob as in the current iteration it sticks out pretty far and I find it catching on my kit. Now it has never rotated off of my previous settings but it is a slight annoyance sticking so far off the side of my rifle. Change the magnification ring to accept the same levers that are on the new PLx 1-8. Add thick dark black lines at 3, 6, and 9 o'clock like on the Nightforce DMx reticle to help draw the eye to the center of the reticle at low magnifications. On the reticle, make it more like the Nightforce DMx and not like the Leupold CMR as the CMR lacks some critical aiming points in it's attempt as staying simple. Ideally, make the chevron smaller or go to a traditional reticle center. Finally, keep the magnification as 2-10 as 2x low end is perfect for most engagements from 30-100yds and the top end at 10x to help maintain weight/clarity, but also because a lot of rifle competitions like the gasgun show limit the top end to 10x for various divisions. I believe that with these changes this, let's call "PLx 2-10x32mm FFP" would dominate most 13.7-18" barreled rifles where the goal was a sort of General Purpose Rifle that can do just about anything. If the form factor and weight were better or closer to what most consider to be the best LPVOs available today, with the abilities of parallax adjustment and badass reticle, would make it an easy choice for many. Yes, 2-10x32 or 2-10x36 would be awesome. Edit to add. It also needs a 30mm tube. |
Carpe diem - Seize the day
Carpe per diem - Seize the expense check
Carpe per diem - Seize the expense check
|
I would like to see this brought back with a footprint that can use existing ADM, Larue, etc mounts. Aimpoint M4S, Holosun 510c, something. Uses cr123 for huge battery life. Multiple reticle options. Green laser or ir laser that uses and ngal plug in the front. |
|
Originally Posted By Gamma762: https://www.ar15.com/forums/industry/What-would-you-like-to-see-next-from-Primary-Arms-optics-/325-286294/?r=3832975&dlnk=1#i3832975 https://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=2&f=325&t=286294&tl=What-would-you-like-to-see-next-from-Primary-Arms-optics-&page=15#i4116713 Not to sound like a broken record... maybe just broken... https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/Looking-for-something-similar-to-the-old-weaver-1-3-lpvo/18-791131/ Yes. A lightweight 1-4, 1” tube, with the NOVA reticle with only 200, 300 and 400 yard drops. |
|
Originally Posted By hoody2shoez: A plx-c nova with an increased exit pupil to 10mm. The increased exit pupil will help with eyebox at 8x. Also increase the hold over mil grid to 8mils. A plxc nova 1-6 in the 14oz range. Regarding the first, I don't think that's going to be physically possible, unfortunately. At least, not with today's technology. Unless you are willing to give up the 1x on the bottom end and let it be 2-8 or so. The second, hell yeah. If Sig can do it, PA certainly can too. But PA could do it better, keep it in the PLXc family. |
|
Originally Posted By SpyHawk: Regarding the first, I don't think that's going to be physically possible, unfortunately. At least, not with today's technology. Unless you are willing to give up the 1x on the bottom end and let it be 2-8 or so. The second, hell yeah. If Sig can do it, PA certainly can too. But PA could do it better, keep it in the PLXc family. It's more than possible The Steiner p4xi has a 12mm exit pupil as does the atacr (11.x for the latter. Close enough) The t6xi has a 10.x exit pupil Delta stryker 1-6hd has an 11.x exit pupil It's more than possible. The nova being sfp needs to be at max to use the mil drops and it is punishing. |
|
Originally Posted By cone256: Any news on a GLX 2-10 replacement? Once there is an update to share we will be posting it! |
|
Originally Posted By hoody2shoez: It's more than possible The Steiner p4xi has a 12mm exit pupil as does the atacr (11.x for the latter. Close enough) The t6xi has a 10.x exit pupil Delta stryker 1-6hd has an 11.x exit pupil It's more than possible. The nova being sfp needs to be at max to use the mil drops and it is punishing. Most people will scoff at it, but the 1.25-4 Leupold’s that don’t used a reduction lens have the biggest eye box you can get on a LPVO. I think the discontinued VXF 1.5-4 was rated at 15mm. That’s almost the same as a T2. Plus the lighter weight, cheaper to make, and better glass quality from having less lenses. A 1.25-4 Nova with the GLX turrets coming in at around 14 ounces would be epic. But maybe not putting the throw lever at 1X to where it pokes you in the chest when slung. |
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: Most people will scoff at it, but the 1.25-4 Leupold’s that don’t used a reduction lens have the biggest eye box you can get on a LPVO. I think the discontinued VXF 1.5-4 was rated at 15mm. That’s almost the same as a T2. Plus the lighter weight, cheaper to make, and better glass quality from having less lenses. A 1.25-4 Nova with the GLX turrets coming in at around 14 ounces would be epic. But maybe not putting the throw lever at 1X to where it pokes you in the chest when slung. That's a hell of a good point. |
|
Originally Posted By hoody2shoez: It's more than possible The Steiner p4xi has a 12mm exit pupil as does the atacr (11.x for the latter. Close enough) The t6xi has a 10.x exit pupil Delta stryker 1-6hd has an 11.x exit pupil It's more than possible. The nova being sfp needs to be at max to use the mil drops and it is punishing. Originally Posted By hoody2shoez: Originally Posted By SpyHawk: Regarding the first, I don't think that's going to be physically possible, unfortunately. At least, not with today's technology. Unless you are willing to give up the 1x on the bottom end and let it be 2-8 or so. The second, hell yeah. If Sig can do it, PA certainly can too. But PA could do it better, keep it in the PLXc family. It's more than possible The Steiner p4xi has a 12mm exit pupil as does the atacr (11.x for the latter. Close enough) The t6xi has a 10.x exit pupil Delta stryker 1-6hd has an 11.x exit pupil It's more than possible. The nova being sfp needs to be at max to use the mil drops and it is punishing. I’ve been complaining about exit pupil ever since the first generation 1-6. Accupoint 1-4 has 17mm and the Burris MTAC 1-4 had 24mm. |
|
Originally Posted By cone256: No GLX updates, that's disappointing To be fair, at the show they said they were going to release new products throughout the year instead of just doing one big announcement at SHOT. I’d like to have seen more, but that 1.5-12 is pretty dang sick. |
|
Originally Posted By OlympicArmsFan: I just picked up a GLx 1x and wouldn’t mind a 3x and 5x. Glass is so clear. Also, would love a GLx 2x without the knob on the side. Maybe a slightly bigger window. I had the GLx 2x years ago and thought it was a great optic but hated that knob on the side. We are always trying to provide a better product to our customers. |
|
Here's a wacky idea that maybe nobody else would want I dunno... A mount for the SLx small dot sight that fits the Ruger 10/22 receiver. The point being to eliminate the normal rail and clamp parts so as to get the sight as low as possible onto the receiver. |
This is...a clue - Pat_Rogers
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo
CO, MI, OR - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo
CO, MI, OR - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders
Joined:
Mar 2022
Posts:
43
EE: 100% (12)
USA
I will add again that an Elcan style optic would be ideal for a lot of people. I like the new variable prisms that have been coming out but I think a simple 1 and 4 like the Elcan does would be ideal (unless they could stretch it to 5 or 6 perhaps). Oh, and green illumination off the bat please. 
|
|
I will add again that an Elcan style optic would be ideal for a lot of people. I like the new variable prisms that have been coming out but I think a simple 1 and 4 like the Elcan does would be ideal (unless they could stretch it to 5 or 6 perhaps). Oh, and green illumination off the bat please. +1 |
This is...a clue - Pat_Rogers
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo
CO, MI, OR - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo
CO, MI, OR - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders
|
Originally Posted By Samwali: I will add again that an Elcan style optic would be ideal for a lot of people. I like the new variable prisms that have been coming out but I think a simple 1 and 4 like the Elcan does would be ideal (unless they could stretch it to 5 or 6 perhaps). Oh, and green illumination off the bat please. Give me this and I’ll replace all my optics in each of the rifles I own and call it a day. By the way @PrimaryArms it’s a lot of rifles too. |
|
The thing with the Elcan was that it was optimized for 4x, and the 1x that rotated in had to be stepped down to 1x, which is why it is so bad at 1x. I think going the other way, where the thing was optimized for 1x but could rotate in a 4x or 5x to step up, would be better for most non-military people. |
