My experience with the RT-6 is based on a a sample size of three, only one of which I personally own. Mine sits on a 18" rifle gassed build I use mostly for 2/3 Gun and Cola Warrior.  I am not a serious
competitor, but I do ok all things considered.

The other optics belong to a friend and a guy I shoot against.  We are all middle aged and spread of recreational funds among various interest.  The goal in each case was getting maximum advantage for as little investment as possible.  They both adopted the optic unseen.  I only bought one after seeing theirs

The only other budget LPVO in my household is the MTAC on the son's carbine, but I make it a habit to shoot and compare optics with anyone that is interested, so I keep and idea of what is out there and how things stack up.

Optical Clarity: The RT-6 doesn't have the extreme fisheye commonly found in LPVO of its price range. In clarity, it is not a Vortex Viper or P4Xi but it is astonishingly close given the price difference.  I think it may be the equal of the Burris XTR II line being phased out, but I need formal comparison before I call that one.

Reticle: The RT-6 is etched glass, which I like for durability, although it more difficult to get daylight bright.  The P4Xi has a daylight bright dot, but projects onto aluminum wire
Great shortcut for daylight bright dot, but it makes for a weak point in an otherwise great optic.  The RT-6 is not daylight bright in my book.  It will wash out in bright enough sunlight.

The reticle itself is a horseshoe dot with BDC holdovers and wind holds.  Only the horseshoe and central dot are illuminated. I think it is a great compromise although I might have done mils instead of BDC.

Eyebox: The RT-6 has better eyebox than the Strike Eagle.  It is notably faster to get behind at hight magnification, although it isn't as pronounced with shooters that are well practiced with a Strike Eagle.  The trade off is slight reduction of FOV.  Physics can't be cheated.  When say slight, I think the difference is like 9" at 100 yards on 6X.  On the practical side, the outer 10% of the Strike Eagle's image is of limited usefulness, so you might actually lose ground.  To beat the RT-6 eyebox you have to step up to the P4Xi and even then it is only an incremental step.

Durability: This is the real question. Fortunately the answer is easy.  Durability in a LPVO of this price is highly questionable. To make a scope more robust takes additional $$$ or additional weight.  You start to see the some benefits in $600-800 optics.  The Burris XTR II is a good example.

As for my RT-6, it's seen fewer than 3k rounds and a few instances of indifferent handling.  It hasn't died yet.  I consider it and indeed all entry level LPVO to have the life expectancy of a goldfish won at the county fair.  They are going to die on you and you'll never know when.

The most commonly broken optic in 2/3 Gun is the Strike Eagle.  This isn't because there is some fault to it, it is just the most common entry level optic.  It's that simple.

If you need a truly durable optic under $400 my choice is a basic Aimpoint.   I think prism sights are generally more robust dollar for dollar than LPVO, so if you had to a magnified optic and real durability is an truly an issue, this would be my pick.

Final Assessment: If you are set on a LPVO and $400 is a hard limit, durability isn't really a thing.  Glass quality and overall feature combination makes the RT-6 a winner with the next step up being the Steiner P4Xi.  If you look back at the thread, I think you will find these are the two most recommended optics.  There are reasons for this.

I will second that I have read mostly positive experience with the RT6. More so than the P4Xi. I don't own one myself but have come back to my research on them more than once.

I believe they are also made in the Philippines?

I did own a px4i for a breif time, but ended up selling it to fund a Razor. The glass on those P4Xi's are really nice.

Best LPVO under $400?

https://www.natchezss.com/burris-xtr-ii-rifle-scope-1-5x24mm-illum-xtr-ii-ballistic-cq-mil-reticle-mad-system-mil-knobs-matte.html

Natchez has a coupon code that gives you $25 off for the next 45 minutes, making it $398.49.  It isn't perfect, but it is the best deal going.

https://palmettostatearmory.com/vortex-strike-eagle-1-8x24mm-riflescope-vortex-sport-cantilever-30mm-ring-mount.html

They were selling them for $299. Smoking deal! Says they are out of stock right now but I bet they’ll be back soon.

Exactly the kind of response I'm looking for.

A note on why I want to try an LPVO.

This is mostly for 2gun, CW and a more GP boogaloo gun. My main boogaloo gun is an SBR with an Aimpoint pro. As state,d the long AR is wearing a PA 2.5 prism. I'm pleased with the durability and clarity of it. But it doesn't give enough magnification to make the close range trade off worth it. And it really isn't much help after around 200 yards.  At 2.5 I still see the DBAL in front of it and that's a PITA when trying to shoot something that actually requires using the whole FOV.  Close range speed is more important to me than the high magnification.  Most of my 2gun is inside of 100 yards, and dots are fine, but on this gun I would like to be able to reliably reach out to 300-200 yards. (And my eyes are getting worse) I'm thinking the circle dots of the LPVOs will be almost as fast at the close stuff.

A note on durability

Durability is important to me, and I want to hear as much about it as possible.  I like that these scopes have etched reticles, as the electronics are the main thing that might go wrong, I still have (and practice with) BUIS.  The fact that the Strike Eagle has performed in combat situations is a big plus and the fact that I have seen them on quite a few three gun rifles.  But I recognize that it might have been chosen for availability reasons.  I am searching for info on all of them, the info on RT6 performance is very helpful.  I have seen very little info on it.

Pluses I see in the RT6 so far...

I like the amount of illumination in the reticent.  Meaning the fact that only the circle and dot are illuminated.  This is what you need in close in shooting, the stadia lines illuminated in the others makes it to busy IMO.  I wish the things on the side weren't even there.



The review on Brownell's and Midway USA seem very positive.  I can't find many reviews elsewhere.

I like that a throw lever seems to be built in.

I have an RT-6 on my AUG, and definitely prefer it to the PA or Strike Eagles. Glass quality is fantastic for the price, forgiving eyebox, and the reticle isn't too busy where it gets in the way. The throw lever is also a really nice addition, and you can easily move it around if you want.

I was planning to pick up the Steiner, but I got the Burris for 295$ shipped.

Just as an add on, I haven't abused the optic. I've dinged it against a few doorways and on my truck, hasn't lost much finish yet. Roughly 1,600 rounds through it, no mechanical faults as of yet.

In regards to illumination, definitely not daylight bright. Haven't personally found a reason for that level of illumination for an etched reticle though.

Thanks for the input

I'm trying to figure out the difference between the MTAC and RT6

Got to look through an RT6 Saturday and an Strike Eagle yesterday.

Got to say clarity goes to the RT6.  Practicality wise not much difference in the reticles.  I think that's the decision.

Probably gonna go with the Aero Precision ultra lightweight mount

How does the illumination of the Arrowhead compare to the PA1-6 Raptor?

Pretty similar, we are a BIT better but still not as good as Steiner PX4i or Vortex Razor. I would say we are near the tops for brightness in an etched reticle type of illumination, but the "light pipe" in the Steiner and Razor is in a whole different class.

Nvm

Check out the Europtic Nikon clearance. May be a better value eight now.

Just grabbed a 1-8 Strike Eagle off of the EE today with mount for $250, but now reading this thread, you guys are giving me anxiety about my purchase!

I had read that article about them being used in a theater, and some of the "independent reivews".  Was kind of wanting an above average durable LPVO for a rifle, knew the glass wouldn't be as good as higher end stuff.

Bad choice???

Get the Primary Arms 1-6, The ACSS reticle is better than the Strike Eagle reticle and the Primary Arms has a better eye-box.

I have had both and prefer the Primary Arms with ACSS reticle.

Viper 1-6

Got it in today, probably have it at the range Monday

Attached File

Curious as to your initial findings...

Got it zeroed last weekend and did some up drills on a 1/2 steel IPSC at 100 and some double tap drills on a paper plate at 25. (Didn't have a silhouette)

I could hit pretty easily with it. Close up they are not as fast as a red dot, don't care what anyone says. But it's faster at 100. And faster close in than my low power prism. (Which is what I wanted)

Today I did position drills at 100 against the steel and some reactive drills out to 50. Then I put the steel at 250.

Position drill really test the eyebox compared to other optics. I notice the eyebox, which was never a problem with the prism and of course not a red dot. But it never stopped me.

i got faster with the reactive drills. The illumination is just for low light, didn't do shit for me on a bright day. I should have brought a faster gun to see how much I'm giving up.

From the prone at 250 it was boringly easy. Which is what I wanted this for (as I've gotten older I have issues that far with a dot) This was the only time I took it off 1x.

the glass seems really good to me, even looking through a buddies much better LPVO.

So far I am happy

With some practice you can be 90-95% as fast as a red dot most of the time. The difference shows up in competition.
Awkward shooting positions highlight the difference.  How relative it is to the real world under normal circumstances...

Does the benefit you get from the LPVO outweigh the close up speed of the red dot?