Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/8/2003 2:45:30 AM EDT
What optic would be best for subject application? Shot would be from dark interior of residence or building, range less than 100 m, to a target in the dark outside. Target can be identified as enemy but target visual details are limited. No night vision equipment is available or wanted.
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 2:47:51 AM EDT
This is kinda scary...
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 2:53:01 AM EDT
It's not scary. I'm just looking for info. Most folks are praising optics for a number of reasons, but I haven't found any discussion on how they perform at night. It's night half of the day, you know.
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 3:03:05 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/8/2003 3:03:14 AM EDT by Lumpy196]
Gotcha now...must have been the phrasing. What are your concerns about using optics at night? And are you talking reflex types (Aimpoint, Eotech) or magnified (ACOG)?
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 3:19:56 AM EDT
Optics as in telescopes? ELCAN or Trijicon TA-series will work well. The ELCAN gathers lots of light. If you're thinking of dot sights the application required a powered sight (as do 99% of the situations where the targets shoot back) like the Aimpoint CompM2 (M68 CCO). Unless you're fighting in a real war you're not going to have any shots like this, so I'm guessing the question is academic. -- Chuck
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 9:22:05 AM EDT
Wasn't thinking of telescopes, but am not against mild magnification. Have been thinking about EOTech vs. Aimpoint for some time, and night capability might be the differentiator. Thanks for input on this application requiring powered sight. Didn't know if Trijicon ACOG would work well here. Comp M is much cheaper too.
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 10:12:01 AM EDT
The passive or tritium sights fail in the critical real world setting you define as well as in dawn and dusk situations. They work fine in bright daylight on the range, and with fully night adapted eyes at night. The rest of the time they're marginal at best and totally useless in many situations. Yeah, they don't need batteries, but if you can't see the dot what benefit is that? If you lose your night vision due to a large flash of light (not that this could ever happen in a gunfight [;)]) the passive sights are useless at night. The M68 CCO may have to be cranked up all the way, but you'll still be able to see the dot. A 4x telescopic sight like the ELCAN can be called "poor man's night vision" due to the amount of light gathered. Simple picket post is visible in all light conditions it's so prominent. Tip triangle glows in the dark. -- Chuck
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 10:20:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/8/2003 10:52:28 AM EDT by Chipster]
Thanks again. Enjoying the reading on the M68 CCO.
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 10:54:05 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 1:43:11 PM EDT
You didn't say if you'd be using a light. If you're not using a light you won't be seeing any targets 100m away unless you're using an Elcan or other decent optic (I found the 3x Compact ACOG to work fairly decently - though not as good as the ELCAN). Note if they are in dark clothing you still won't see them unless you have a light. With a light for CQB I like a powered Dot type sight (EO Tech or Aimpoint). Because the dot will be bright enough to see when the light is on. For distance (say 25-50 yards or more) my preference is for the Trijicon Compact ACOG (TA50-2) with or without a light. I've got some reviews of using these optics during some training classes. The first class we had a drill on how far back could you go and still engage 3 steel plates (one yellow, one black, and one camo). This was done with and without a light. My TA50-2 beat all the other optics (iron sights, Aimpoint, Bushnell Holosight, Trijicon Reflex) except the ELCAN(Instructor's rifle) for usability at night with and without a light. This link covers my experiences comparing the EO Tech to the Compact ACOG at night at CQB distances (with a light). Comments are in the last paragraph. [url]http://groups.msn.com/TheMarylandAR15ShootersSite/carbine2day2.msnw[/url]
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 2:30:48 PM EDT
Both the Eotech and the Aimpoint will work equally well at night, and in dim lighting conditions and will give you a massive increase in you acquisition speed over irons.
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 4:33:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/8/2003 4:34:29 PM EDT by inkaybee]
I use a docter red dot. It is often overlooked, but it is a well made reliable sight. It automaticaly adjusts to the light conditions.
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 6:34:33 PM EDT
Don't intend to use light on weapon. Is there a difference between M68 or the 552 on their alignment with the front sight? (Will post be centered in window or tube?) Seems like the M68 has a lot going for it.
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 11:05:02 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 11:17:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/8/2003 11:17:55 PM EDT by knightone]
Originally Posted By Troy: The EOTech, unfortunately, is setup to center the irons in the field of view, which IMO (and others) causes the irons to block too much of the field of view. And because the mount is integral, there's no way to correct this. Hopefully it will be addressed by the manufacturer at some point (along with ARMS throwlevers! I can hope, can't I?). For the EOTech, I make an exception to my "no front flip-ups", as my ideal configuration for an EOTech equipped rifle would be front and back flip-ups to get them out of the way. -Troy
View Quote
This is somewhat subjective, though. Once I got used to the EOTech, I didn't really mind it. In fact, the EOTech is now my favorite sight. However, if they were to raise it just a hair and add an integral throw lever, it would be extremely hard to beat it. Given those improvements and a 4MOA dot as an option, I think it would give Aimpoint users a reason to switch.
Top Top