User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 1:40:03 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOk but how large is it? How large is that horseshoe and the chevron? Are they extremely small like on your other optics? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 5:23:10 PM EDT
[#2]
No, it's at least double the size of the Gen 1 cyclops. I will compare them side by side
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 5:27:00 PM EDT
[#3]
Picture taken of reticle this morning. Sadly, the resolution is low here on arfcom.
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 6:51:32 PM EDT
[#4]
Can you run a magnifier behind a prizm optic?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 7:08:21 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Picture taken of reticle this morning. Sadly, the resolution is low here on arfcom. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/5205/5425CED4-384B-4AFB-8774-5015D66201EF-1914895.jpg @MRW Outstanding. Thank you very much--and thank you for clarifying the subtension values on the reticle etching. Makes perfect sense. I'm probably in for 2. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 7:25:01 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Picture taken of reticle this morning. Sadly, the resolution is low here on arfcom. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/5205/5425CED4-384B-4AFB-8774-5015D66201EF-1914895.jpg 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 8:35:29 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Picture taken of reticle this morning. Sadly, the resolution is low here on arfcom. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/5205/5425CED4-384B-4AFB-8774-5015D66201EF-1914895.jpg Sweet, what's eyebox like at 6+" eye relief? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 9:00:03 PM EDT
[#8]
Yes, comparing them side by side, the Gen 2 horseshoe reticle looks 2.5-3x larger than the Gen 1, and the chevron is bigger too. A very crude measurement places my eye at about 3.5" from the rear lens in order to see the full field of view.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 11:18:29 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Picture taken of reticle this morning. Sadly, the resolution is low here on arfcom. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/5205/5425CED4-384B-4AFB-8774-5015D66201EF-1914895.jpg Why do they always do this? Why does Primary Arms make a chevron but then make it so small it might as well be a dot? Feels like false advertising. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 11:42:11 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well that's what I suspected. That's a pass. Why do they always do this? Why does Primary Arms make a chevron but then make it so small it might as well be a dot? Feels like false advertising. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2021 2:04:32 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well that's what I suspected. That's a pass. Why do they always do this? Why does Primary Arms make a chevron but then make it so small it might as well be a dot? Feels like false advertising. I really don’t understand this critique of their optics. The point of the chevron is to allow it to be used for bdc. You can make it as big as you want, but the bigger it is, the more useless it is for precise shots. It’s an unmagnifed optic. It’s supposed to be used as a red dot for anything within 100 yards, and outside that, you either need to be taking your time anyways, or you’ll have a magnifier behind it. If you want a bigger reticle, you need something with more magnification like a 3x or an ACOG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2021 5:53:40 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well that's what I suspected. That's a pass. Why do they always do this? Why does Primary Arms make a chevron but then make it so small it might as well be a dot? Feels like false advertising. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2021 9:43:42 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well that's what I suspected. That's a pass. Why do they always do this? Why does Primary Arms make a chevron but then make it so small it might as well be a dot? Feels like false advertising. If you haven't physically looked through one, you might change your mind. Pictures online don't do it justice. I find it pretty easy to "lollipop" targets using the chevron for better precision. Here's my 2x...I'm guessing the 1x is pretty much the same, just difficult to get a good photo: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2021 10:06:16 AM EDT
[#14]
A reticle can only be so big at a given magnification. At 1X it’s going to be small no matter what compared to a 1-6 where the SFP reticle is sized for 6X.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2021 10:20:28 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A reticle can only be so big at a given magnification. At 1X it’s going to be small no matter what compared to a 1-6 where the SFP reticle is sized for 6X. It is only small due to the features/functionality they are trying to get out of the reticle. If they offered a model that ditched the ranging and BDC for a simpler, larger reticle it would probably sell like hot cakes for PCC. Think the old Vortex 1x 3-ring, but with better eyebox and illumination. I don't really care for 400yd holdovers on a PCC... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2021 12:16:06 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well that's what I suspected. That's a pass. Why do they always do this? Why does Primary Arms make a chevron but then make it so small it might as well be a dot? Feels like false advertising. Big draw of prisms is for persons with astigmatism; which would have more trouble at distance with a red dot. Added bonus of the chevron will aid in more precision shots....use the ring for snap/quick shots. Otherwise, if your eyes are fine...I would just stick with a red dot |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2021 1:21:58 PM EDT
[#17]
quick zoom into the center
the reticle very clearly looks like this. The chevron is easily seen.  I will have side by side views with the Gen 1 Cyclops reticle in my final write up |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2021 3:20:42 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted: Looks like it might be shoulder width at 100yds. That woudl put it at 18 MOA across which would be great if true. Quoted: I really don't understand this critique of their optics. The point of the chevron is to allow it to be used for bdc. You can make it as big as you want, but the bigger it is, the more useless it is for precise shots. It's an unmagnifed optic. It's supposed to be used as a red dot for anything within 100 yards, and outside that, you either need to be taking your time anyways, or you'll have a magnifier behind it. If you want a bigger reticle, you need something with more magnification like a 3x or an ACOG. The point of the chevron is it can be as big as you want it to be and still have a fine tip point for precision; so you can have a giant chevron that is 18 MOA across and 12 MOA tall and still converges to a point so you get a large easy to see CQB chevron and a very precise aiming point for 200 yards. Primary Arms has in the past made the chevron so small that without more than 3x magnification instead of this nice crisp < you end up with a ( which still functions in close as intented but the sharp tip is gone so fidning the tip to make 200 yards shots is difficult if not impossible. I tried the Holosun red dot they made with the ACSS reticle and the Trijicon Acog 1.5x model with the ACSS recitle but the chevron is like 6 MOA wide and 4 MOA tall so with both the chevrons suffered from this problem where they looked more like a ( to me making them pointless for me; I would be paying more for a feature of the reticle I could never use. With the Holoson version I could put a magnifier behind it which helped and made it usable as intended but with the ACOG can't really do that. I don't know if it's bad form to say this on the Primary Arms post but Swampfox seems to understand this and put a giant chevron/arrow on their 1x prism which is ideal. Quoted: It's not. it's very clearly a chevron, about three times the size of the chevron on the Gen 1. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2021 3:27:00 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It is only small due to the features/functionality they are trying to get out of the reticle. If they offered a model that ditched the ranging and BDC for a simpler, larger reticle it would probably sell like hot cakes for PCC. Think the old Vortex 1x 3-ring, but with better eyebox and illumination. I don't really care for 400yd holdovers on a PCC... I 100% agree with this and I don't understand why no one seems intrested in making it. I know rifles are what most people are interested in but PCCs have taken off like crazy in the last few years. Hell the ACSS Vulcan chevron reticle they put in the Holosun 507c itself seems great; if they just put that in a Holosun 403/503 enclosed red dot so it was a little more weather proof it would be one of the best PCC optics out there period. Big fat easy to find chevron at speed, sharp point for those lower propability shots where you need to take your time. And then if they put it in this new 1x Prism as an option it would cover all the bases between peope that want a red dot or people with astigmatism that want an etched reticle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2021 6:20:42 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I 100% agree with this and I don't understand why no one seems intrested in making it. I know rifles are what most people are interested in but PCCs have taken off like crazy in the last few years. Hell the ACSS Vulcan chevron reticle they put in the Holosun 507c itself seems great; if they just put that in a Holosun 403/503 enclosed red dot so it was a little more weather proof it would be one of the best PCC optics out there period. Big fat easy to find chevron at speed, sharp point for those lower propability shots where you need to take your time. And then if they put it in this new 1x Prism as an option it would cover all the bases between peope that want a red dot or people with astigmatism that want an etched reticle. For me personally, I can still use the small chevron as a dot (my 2x felt smaller than an eotech donut although I never measured). Then I can use the chevron for ranging if needed, but in most applications within 100-200 yards it was just a matter of putting the reticle on the target. In that way, I think it much more closely approximates a red dot set up. With the 3x magnifier with ranging included, it really seems like it’ll pair nicely with that. I agree that the Vulcan is a cool idea and could probably be a good reticle for a rifle, but I think you still get a ton of CQB functionality out of the current reticle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2021 1:47:13 PM EDT
[#21]
I'm at the indoor range with it. At 25 yards, the center chevron is a bit wider and about the same height as the 2-inch darkened square on a LaRue target. It's big enough to be clearly seen as a chevron, even with my 50 year old astigmatism eyes.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2021 1:53:30 PM EDT
[#22]
I am new to NV, have astigmatism, have an optic-less MK18, am on a budget, and my only complaint with the ACSS 1.5x ACOG was the size of the reticle/chevron. On paper it looks like this optic was specifically designed for me lol. Can't wait.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2021 2:06:04 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm at the indoor range with it. At 25 yards, the center chevron is a bit wider and about the same height as the 2-inch darkened square on a LaRue target. It's big enough to be clearly seen as a chevron, even with my 50 year old astigmatism eyes. I'm trying to do the math. 2" at 25 yards would be 8 inches at 100 so it is roughly 8 MOA tall and a little bigger than 8 MOA wide, let's call it 10 MOA. 8x10 MOA is very promising. I might actualy like this one. Thank you for the info. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2021 2:30:58 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It is only small due to the features/functionality they are trying to get out of the reticle. If they offered a model that ditched the ranging and BDC for a simpler, larger reticle it would probably sell like hot cakes for PCC. Think the old Vortex 1x 3-ring, but with better eyebox and illumination. I don't really care for 400yd holdovers on a PCC... Preaching to the choir. I don’t want high detail ranging in any prism/LPVO past 400 yards. I think their KISS reticle would be perfect in their 1, 2, and 3X prisms, PCC or 5.56. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2021 5:04:58 PM EDT
[#25]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2021 7:42:08 PM EDT
[#26]
Stop the teasing!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2021 7:19:51 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote History@MRW which mount is that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2021 7:32:53 PM EDT
[#28]
 It's the mount included with the optic |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2021 8:40:45 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Preaching to the choir. I don’t want high detail ranging in any prism/LPVO past 400 yards. I think their KISS reticle would be perfect in their 1, 2, and 3X prisms, PCC or 5.56. If they had a 1 or 2 moa dot on a post with a horseshoe, and then maybe some bdc for long range I would be all over it. I am looking for a rds type reticle that I can see with my astigmatism and that is all. I don't care for ACSS w/chevron one tiny bit. I want quick target ascuisition. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2021 3:52:00 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/5205/D4AC064B-96D8-40F0-A9C5-F7F97FBBCBD7-1918992.jpg It's the mount included with the optic Do you need it that far back for eye relief or does it have enough to mount all the way forward on the upper? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2021 5:59:00 AM EDT
[#31]
It's got roughly the same eye relief like any other lensatic scope, which usually places the ocular lens back by the end of the receiver. But it's only one fifth the length of a regular scope, and that's why it looks like it's mounted "that far back". It's not as far back as a TA31 4x ACOG would be. It's not a red dot, where the light just comes straight through the tube, nor is it proper to place it over the ejection port like a red dot.
if you want to move it forward, it will still work, but you won't get as much field of view through the tube, BUT being 1x magnification, whatever field of view you lose inside the tube, you gain in seeing more outside the tube. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2021 6:41:45 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's got roughly the same eye relief like any other lensatic scope, which usually places the ocular lens back by the end of the receiver. But it's only one fifth the length of a regular scope, and that's why it looks like it's mounted "that far back". It's not as far back as a TA31 4x ACOG would be. It's not a red dot, where the light just comes straight through the tube, nor is it proper to place it over the ejection port like a red dot. if you want to move it forward, it will still work, but you won't get as much field of view through the tube, BUT being 1x magnification, whatever field of view you lose inside the tube, you gain in seeing more outside the tube. Cool, thanks |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2021 3:13:50 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/5205/D4AC064B-96D8-40F0-A9C5-F7F97FBBCBD7-1918992.jpg It's the mount included with the optic Am I right in thinking that is the same base mount as the ACOG 1.5x? or is it more of the MRO style of base? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2021 3:16:27 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Am I right in thinking that is the same base mount as the ACOG 1.5x? or is it more of the MRO style of base? Pretty sure it uses ACOG pattern mounts |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2021 8:09:43 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Pretty sure it uses ACOG pattern mounts Correct |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2021 8:27:03 PM EDT
[#36]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2021 11:51:19 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2021 12:00:02 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's got roughly the same eye relief like any other lensatic scope, which usually places the ocular lens back by the end of the receiver. But it's only one fifth the length of a regular scope, and that's why it looks like it's mounted "that far back". It's not as far back as a TA31 4x ACOG would be. It's not a red dot, where the light just comes straight through the tube, nor is it proper to place it over the ejection port like a red dot. if you want to move it forward, it will still work, but you won't get as much field of view through the tube, BUT being 1x magnification, whatever field of view you lose inside the tube, you gain in seeing more outside the tube. The main thing I want out of this is the ability to shoot with NODs Mounting position needs to be higher and further forward. I want to get one to test all this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2021 3:50:12 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Can you run a magnifier behind a prizm optic? I would like to know this as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2021 10:42:34 AM EDT
[#40]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History Quoted: Can you run a magnifier behind a prizm optic? I would like to know this as well. With a 1x it may be possible but I would think there would be eye relief issues. If you position for propper eye relief using the magnifyer, when you flip it to the side to use the primary optic would you not have to move your head considerably forward to get full FOV? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2021 3:11:20 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The main thing I want out of this is the ability to shoot with NODs Mounting position needs to be higher and further forward. I want to get one to test all this. Through my testing, with LVPO's - the end of your helmet mounted device becomes your new "eyeball" - works fine for me. Light transmission is more suckier - fine with binos, less so with a monocular. You want increased height, and length of pull, to get behind it (plate carrier takes care of some of that with the shoulder pad/strap). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2021 3:47:04 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/5205/D4AC064B-96D8-40F0-A9C5-F7F97FBBCBD7-1918992.jpg It's the mount included with the optic |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/6/2021 11:44:53 AM EDT
[#43]
Looks very promising. When will these actually be available for purchase?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/7/2021 11:27:10 PM EDT
[#44]
Looked at one of the 2x’s at a LGS today. They look awesome, still not sure about the logic to release the 2x first. I’ll buy at least 2 if they are released
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2021 12:32:21 AM EDT
[#45]
Did we ever get an update for the pre-order time? It has been tough holding back from completing a build because I’m waiting on this to come out.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2021 4:42:28 AM EDT
[#46]
Will these have a diopter adjustment feature?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2021 9:32:28 AM EDT
[#47]
Yes to the diopter adjustment
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2021 7:38:52 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Through my testing, with LVPO's - the end of your helmet mounted device becomes your new "eyeball" - works fine for me. Light transmission is more suckier - fine with binos, less so with a monocular. You want increased height, and length of pull, to get behind it (plate carrier takes care of some of that with the shoulder pad/strap). Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The main thing I want out of this is the ability to shoot with NODs Mounting position needs to be higher and further forward. I want to get one to test all this. Through my testing, with LVPO's - the end of your helmet mounted device becomes your new "eyeball" - works fine for me. Light transmission is more suckier - fine with binos, less so with a monocular. You want increased height, and length of pull, to get behind it (plate carrier takes care of some of that with the shoulder pad/strap). Same. But I wonder how much light transmission you will get with a prism vs LPVO, since LPVOs typically have many lenses inside of them, whereas the prism is much simpler. Each lens will eat a little bit of your light. So I would expect a prism to be somewhere in the middle between a good red dot and LPVO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2021 2:28:57 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Did we ever get an update for the pre-order time? It has been tough holding back from completing a build because I’m waiting on this to come out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2021 9:48:11 AM EDT
[#50]
It says that it will cowitness, but with 3.6 inches of eye relief how does that work out exactly?
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
Attached File