As much as I like my aimpoint, I’m starting to think that it might not be the ideal optic for me. It does most of the things I need, except for I really wish I had some magnification on it and that has me thinking that maybe I should switch to a scope. Before I drop the money though, I thought it would be a good idea to ask the folks here that have used a variety of optics before I spend any money.
First I’ll give a little background regarding the gun and what I use it for. The gun is a Charles Daly M4LE carbine with most of the magpul MOE upgrades, a surefire 6PL mounted on it, and an aimpoint 9000sc(4 MOA dot). I bought the gun for ranch use, which is mostly getting critters aywhere from 1-400 yards(400 yards is a bit of a stretch, but I would like that capability) and in the event that I might have to defend myself. Somehow about all I use it for is an HD rifle and while that is good and all, I would like to use it how I originally intended to use it. I still wouldn’t half mind still being able to use it for HD, but I do have other guns that could fill that role.
This leads me back to why I was thinking about a scope. The aimpoint is good up close, but it seems like that past 100 yards, it gets harder to use. I thought that a low power variable scope or even low power fixed magnification scope might be a better option. I figured that if I got a scope with an illuminated reticle I wouldn’t be giving up much from an aimpoint(at least for what I’m up to) and would gain the magnification I think I need. Would you guys say that I would benefit from a scope? If so should I look at either a fixed or variable? Thanks.
One other thing. I’m not considering a RDS and magnifier since the one I have wouldn’t work too well and I worry that a new RDS and a magnifier might get too expensive.
I just dumped my iron sight on the M&P 15, and went with a 6x18-40.
Much more fun. At 100 yards you can put holes into holes, if you’re steady enough.
Even at 200 yards you can see the holes. As far as a home defense weapon,
it then becomes a point and shoot, since the bad guy(s) will only be a few feet
away. But for your recreational use, it is much more enjoyable to be able to see
and hit very little things.
Why not a 3X magnifier?
The 4 MOA dot, while not optimal, is not all that bad.
It would be a cheaper than a decent variable and with the LT mount it can be swung easily out of the way or even ditched if being used solely indoors.
I would probaby be more open to the magnifier concept if I wasn’t using a 9000sc(I got it on sale and it was a way to see if I would like an RDS without buying junk). It’s awfully big and I don’t know if there is any mount that would put it far enough ahead and at the correct height for a magnifier to work. The only other thing was that I kind of liked the idea of having a scope with a permanent reticle. Now I know that aimpoints are extremely reliable, but I’m still somewhat distrustful of anything that is electronic. With a scope if the illumination module dies, at the very least I still have a reticle to aim with.
That being said, I did realize that a C3 with a good mount and a larue po boy special would cost about the same as some of my scope ideas, but for some reason the po boy magnifier page isn’t working on larue’s site. Are they gone?
So now I’ve got a few ideas on what I might want with a scope, 2 are fixed mag and 2 are 1-4 or close to that. I’m not really sure which would be better fixed mag, or get a variable.
Oops, I completely missed that you have a 9000.
Here’s my opinon on optics-
The rifle you depend on for HD should have an RDS. They are simply the most efficient aiming device for realistic high-stress use.
Other guns can have other “jobs”, and therefore other optics.
If I had only one gun to fill a GP role I would stick on an RDS and have a flip mounted magnifier with easy attachemtn for use if I walked out the door.
For a dedicated HD/CQB gun I would only have an RDS.
If I had an HD gun already with an RDS and wanted something else to spice up my life or to meet mid-range challenges more efficiently I would opt for an ACOG of the 3-4X variety or a comparably prived variable.
If I really wanted to push an AR to the edge of it’s realistic performance envelope I would look at a good 10X (high) variable.
It really comes down to application and expectation with a big dash of preference and experience.
There is no easy answer other than- Get an Aimpoint on anything you need to protect your life with, nothing else really matters much except to your wallet and ego.
I am thinking along the same line of thought. A variable 1-4 X scope, like the Short Dot, Meopta, Night Force, or Trijicon Accupoint. Seems like that would be perfect and the logical choice for range use. With an illuminated reticle, 1X can easily be used for close in use, without having to augment a 1X RDS with a magnifier, while getting the added benefit of increased magnification when needed. That said, with a RDS zeroed with a 50/200 setting, you shouldn’t have a problem hitting targets out to 300 yards, but shooting varmints will take a little more precision, so you’ll be best served by the variable 1-4 scope.
The rifle you depend on for HD should have an RDS. They are simply the most efficient aiming device for realistic high-stress use.
I could not agree more… most shooters would be better served with an RDS and if they just HAVE to have Magnification(Most use it as a crutch for poor or lazy Skills) then get a Magnifier.
If I do go with a scope, I can definately go with another gun for HD. This isn’t my only AR, just one I wanted to get more use out of, instead of having it sit around not being used for anything. I will agree that for most things my RDS gets the job done. I just figured that a little magnification might not hurt for identifying distant targets and making sure I’m hitting them in the right place. That an the way I see a large number of companies trying to perfect the 1-4x scope make me think there must be something there. I guess I’m not entirely sure if I would want to go with a RDS and magnifier due to the costs involved, but it does sound like a decent idea otherwise. One quick question about the RDS plus magnifier combo. Does having the magnifier flipped to the side ever get in the way(both in obscuring some of the target and/or get caught on things)?
SoDak, sorry, my reading comprehension was a bit low in this thread.
If I had a HD gun setup and squared away and wanted to setup another gun to hit small targets out to 400 meters I would select a decent varible or mid-power fixed. I would want something with an internal BDC. I would want an illuminated reticle for use at lower light conditions and to be able to see the reticle when on blackinsh backgrounds/shandows.
The little Burris XTR Tactical 1-4 seems to have a lot going for it in this type of use. There are, most certainly, other better/more expensive options, I have no idea if you would need what those options offer. From another thread I believe that gotm4 is using one of these on his 3-gun rifle, he may be able to shed some light on it.
Anyway, as far as the magnifier obscuring targets- my experience is that it is minimal, but I don’t have as much experience with the magnifiers as some others here.
A magnified optic will be much more useful for a GP Ranch Rifle that may be pressed into defense use.
I currently use a 1.5X-5 IR Leupold in a LT SPR-E mount for such purposes on one carbine. I like the reticle’s dot for shooting critters. And 5x is usually plenty in Tennessee where our vistas aren’t as wide.
The only way the scope could be better is if the battery life was up there with ACET tech.
The only way the mount could be better is if it was a pivot mount.
I cheated for awhile and had a T1 mounted at 2 o’clock on the Leupold’s tube.
If you are sheerly looking for animal usage only there are few fleas on a Leupold 6x42. Light, bright and plenty of magnification for shots to 400 yards.
I wasn’t completely clear about what I wanted. I said I wanted something that is good for further ranges, but wouldn’t mind(but didn’t condsider it necessary) to have it for HD. I should have just left that off. However keeping it as just a scoped gun for somewhat short to longer ranges is perfectly fine.
I have considered the burris XTR Tactical 1-4 since it seems to offer a lot and was in my price range. I really wish I could handle one first which is hard since I live out in the middle of nowhere. The only scopes on my list I’ve used is the trijicon 1.25-4 accupoint and TA33-8 ACOG. Both of those left a pretty good impression on me and I’m still giving them a look with the only hangup on the ACOG being cost(I know it would be worth it though). The only other scopes I’m considering is a few from IOR Valdada since I might be able to find some of them at a price point that works for me and they sound like they have excellent glass.
Since you have two ARs then the addition of a variable power optic to one of them makes a lot of sense, especially for ranch use on animals out to 400 yds.
I recently ran a few drills with a timer, testing two almost identical carbines, one with an EOTech and the other with a Leupold MK4 1.5-5 illuminated SPR scope. The time splits were so close at, 5-15 yards it was hard to tell them apart. It made me realize just how good a variable power scope in the 1-6 range is.
Now I have a short carbine set up with a RDS and a white light, and another with the Leupold 1.5-5 but I am confident that I am just as fast with the scoped AR at CQB distances.
I’ve got an empty lower that I was thinking of topping off with a Larue Stealth upper and a variable power scope. Unfortunately, is is quite a drive from my house to a range longer than 200 yds.
I have used aimpoints and eotechs with and without magnifiers, 2 TA33 Acogs and numerous 1-4s
I think I have found the perfect setup for my 6.8 with the TR24 with the German #4 and green dot
at 1x it’s great for close range shooting (though a red dot is still a tad faster) and 4x for distance shooting with precision
I still use an Aimpoint on my 5.56 though and think it’s a better setup for “CQB”, not that I do any that and hope I never do…
I’m also using a Leupold 1-4x20 in a LaRue 1.5 mount on one of my LMT/CMMG M4 style AR’s.
If you’re going to use a traditional style glass optic on an AR, be advised to get the LaRue mount. It’s important to get your scope forward enough on the rifle that the eyepiece of the scope does not block access to the charging handle, or cause you to have to extended your stock out unnecessarily long.
Here is an AR set up with an ‘old school’ Wilson mount holding a Nikon 6-18x40SF. While obviously this set up is good enough to bring home supper, I will dump this mount in favor of the LaRue as soon as I get up the scratch.
I am also just about as fast, and much more accurate with a 1-4 scope than I am with the EOTech that used to be on one of my AR’s.
I use my AR’s for hunting and varmint control on a regular basis… I’m very satisfied with this set up for that. I used an AR with a 1-4x20 at this years SI SUT1 Small Unit Tactics class with very satisfactory results also.
Pilgrim, what reticle does that leupold have? I tried what I think was the same model, and I had troubles keeping the duplex reticle from blurring out(maybe since I had both eyes open?). Do you have any problems like this? I was thinking about going to leupold’s custom shop and ordering one with a german #1 since it would have a nice thick post I could see. My only issue is that I’m still on the fence about illumination(limits choice and raises the price, but could be very useful), and that thick post probably makes holdover impossible.
SoDak, the 1-4x20 pictured is a VX-II. Not the best scope in the world clarity wise… the 1x isn’t a true 1x, it’s more like 1.25 power… and the power ring turns kinda hard… But at only 9 oz., it’s lighter than a AA powered EOTech, and it’s relatively inexpensive at $300.
With a scope like this you will naturally squint your non-shooting eye a little while firing, but I have no problem with a blurred reticule even with both eyes held open. Fired a few dozen rounds today with this rifle and didn’t notice any problems with the reticule.
The German #1 always seems like a good idea, till I shoot with one then I, like you, interferes a little with hold over. Check out the #4 (Swarovski) reticule, love this one, but can’t afford the scope it come in!
As to illumination, the only illuminated 1x4 scope that would completely satisfy me would be the Trijicon amber triangled model. Half of my ‘real world’ shooting is done at night, an illuminated reticule would be a HUGE help with this.
I’m coming to a similar conclusion about the illuminated part. It’s got me really looking at a TA33R-8 ACOG since that would fullfill most of what I want. The only thing holding me back on those is the price. I think they are worth it, but at the time it’s a lot of money to scrape togther.
