I don’t understand why you couldn’t use the large quartered ring in the FFP as a red dot? More precisely I don’t really see the virtue of FFP in a 1-4x. If you wanted a precision shot, where you can use the reticle subtends, you’d want it cranked to 4x where it would be useful.
I don’t see the point of having both focal planes especially when you’d have to crank it up all the way on FFP anyways just like you would on an SFP. I can see how having an FFP would be useful if the reticle was big enough at 1x, I can see how SFP would be valid as a kind of do-all optic. I just don’t view this as a game changer. The optic is simply an SFP by another fancy/cool name.
USO makes great stuff and I vastly prefer FFP in my precision scopes but this seems like a solution in search of a problem. It doesn’t even appear to be illuminated.
But all told I’m sure it’s a very nice scope for the cost. I definitely agree about the Short-Dot, the dot is way too small and the scope is too damn heavy and expensive for what it does.
At 75+ yards, the red dot is very helpful in making a precise shot in very low light. The reticle is only slightly visible in the looming darkness and the red dot at 4X is very large and bright. Eventually the reticle is gone but the target is still visible. Moving out past 100, the larger dot on 4X obscures even more of the target. A dot in the SFP that does not grow with the magnification would be useful to me.
At 4X in daylight the reticle is useful and the size of the dot isn’t as big an issue. At longer distances the dot isn’t necessary at all.
In the low light session of a carbine class, Randy Cain was interested in the SD as he mostly sees Aimpoints and EoTechs show up. He too was impressed with the short dot in the dark, except for the size of the dot on 4X. The large circle does nothing for a precise shot at 75-100 yards.
At close distances, the optic is on 1X so a dot in the FFP is small, like it would be in the SFP. I would rather have the dot stay small all the time.
May not be useful for anyone else, but I see a value in it.
Well unless I’m missing something at 1x the USO would would be SFP, at full magnification there is no difference it and an SFP since the reticle subtends work for both. The virtue of FFP is that the reticle works at all magnification settings (1-4x) but you’re only talking about it at 1x and 4x. At the lowest setting the reticle would still be functional as a red dot, just like an SFP.
No I get that it’s different from either a straight SFP or FFP but how it would actually be used doesn’t do that much different from an SFP.
If you’re running it at 1x, you’re functionally using it as an SFP, you’re just using the circle/dot instead of the crosshair. If you’re going to be using the circle/dot anyways why do you need an FFP at 1x?
If you’re running it at 4x, you’re using it as an FFP, but at 4x an SFP is functionally the same as an FFP. If they both use a fully functional crosshair reticle at 4x what’s the downside to an SFP?
In short functionally it’s the same as an SFP.
The main difference as I understand it is that in FFP mode the crosshair stadia would still equal a mil/moa from 2-3x, but that assumes that the reticle is large enough to be functional but then so would a straight FFP optic.
So I’m not getting what it does better than either of the other options but if you see the value, then hey it’s all good.
OK, different approach to explaining why it interests me. The 1 X 4 is on my carbine that I like for 200-300 yards, yet want to be able to use at close range. With a 50 yard zero there is no need to hold over at 200 yards and at CQB you hold high to get a head shot, just like any 1X with a 50 yard zero.
My Short Dot is strictly FFP. At 1x the reticle is almost invisible, and unusable, and the scope is almost like a pure RDS which is how I use it.
At 4X, the reticle is magnified to a usable level in the FFP and can be shot in daylight without the dot. It allows much more precise shots at longer distances. Lighting the dot at 4X in daylight is fine; even though the dot is large, it is not distracting.
I don’t really use anything between 1X and 4X. It’s either all up or all down. At 4X in low light, the size and brightness of the dot in the FFP is distracting and covers to much of the target (again, not a problem in daylight). It would be much more usefull to have the small dot all the time, with no visible reticle at 1x and with a visable and usefull reticle at 4X, which is what USO accomplished by putting the dot and circle in the SFP while the reticle is in the FFP.
So the dual focal plane is interesting to me because the reticle is usable at 4X and the dot is small. At 1X, the reticle almost disappears and the optic is more like a pure RDS. If both were in the SFP, the reticle would not be useful at all since it is tiny and almost invisible.
If I was to get this ACOG, what range would I zero an 11.1’’ gun with Mk. 262 at to make it compatible with the BDC, because this optic might beat the new Short Dot 1-8X for me.
Not trying to snipe you but, out of curiosity, what do you see yourself using your rifle for that you need an ACOG for it?
I wouldn’t worry about the BDC, in my VERY limited experience it is close to useless other than as reference points. Assuming that you are going to be using it in a role against humans are you expecting the to stand still facing you long enough for you to move up and down the range tree until you figure out their range? Works great on range targets, but I tried to use the ranging function on my neighbor across the lake (off the rifle, just holding it in my hand) He was working around the house outside and the few times that he happened to be facing the right direction, he didn’t hold still long enough for me to pic a stadia that matched. He was just working in the yard, if he had been actively trying to shoot me, I would think it would have been even harder. Not only that, but the reticle is MUCH smaller than it looks like in the pictures. Maybe someone who has had alot more training can get something out of it, but I couldn’t.
That being said, I would imagine that you will just have to play with it and see where your bullets land at each stadia line and adjust to pick what you feel is the most useful compromise for your uses.
The role of the optic will be 50-600m, and I had become familiar (confident in my ability) with a TA31-ECOS G in the past.
I had actually become pretty fast with the ACOG’s BDC, and ranging. Especially close up, or very far away. (25m, and 500m+)
Also (call me gay) but I had my ACOG mounted to an airsoft rifle for a while, and used it to success. You’d be surprised how close airsoft rails are to M1913 spec sometimes.
Simple good daylight illuinated reticles that give you red dot type speed, reticles with a BDS built in and low power variables with a range from 1-6,8. These new scopes are ACOG and Red dot killers frankly. Small red dots will still have a place but the place for fixed power optics like the ACOG and full size red dots like the Eotech and full size aimpoints is coming to an end.
Pat
BDC reticles work great in real life as well from what my friends have told me coming back from Iraq and Afganistan. Many times they know the range because they have lazed the target area where the enemy is before they engage. Then just hold on the appropriot mark on the reticle and shoot.
Pat
Daylight illuminated reticles have been around a long time, nothing new there. There are some nice 1-8x scopes out there, but the only ones I’d consider as acceptable are also about 4-5x what an RDS is going to cost you.
I love how people try something on a square range, in standard shooting positions, and who’ve never shot in combat and claim they’re as fast or whatever. I’ve not been in combat but having tried them in classes that relied heavily on non-traditional shooting positions (rollover prone, supine, kimchee squat etc.) shooting over/under and around barricades, they’re aren’t as fast as red dots, they’re not as forgiving when it comes to head position etc. I’ve tried them, I’ve timed them, factor in non-standard shooting positions and you’re not nearly nearly as fast in these positions. Sorry but if they’re not as fast in a shooting class, that teaches non-traditional positions, they’re certainly not going to become so in combat.
Everything has a cost over and above money, accuracy for speed and vice versa. That basic concept hasn’t changed. A variable powered optic of 10 years ago, is still essentially the same as a variable powered optic of today.
These new scopes are ACOG and Red dot killers frankly.
Not really, see above. Factor in money, weight and durability and it’s pretty much down to personal preference. Are they marginally better? Perhaps, but it’s not an objective statement of fact. The above statement is at best a subjective (and rather hyperbolic) opinion.
Lots of folks who have been in combat think highly of variable power optics like the Short Dot. I also train with my gear and I am also a trainer and you can do quite well with a good low power variable. It has its weakness in akward positions but that is often over stated. I have timed myself and done multiple drills using myself and others using red dots, irons and low power variables. Like I said before the eye relief issue is often over stated. Yes its a disadvantage in situations that are likely to be a factor in about.05% of real life shootings. While the magnification you gain can he a help in over 50% of real lifeshootings. Not just for shooting but also for target identification.
Low power variables of today are not the same as those 10 years ago. We have made huge advancements in this area of glass.
I didn’t say people don’t think highly of them. They’re great optics but they serve a different role than the RDS or ACOG and as I stated they’re 4-5x the cost of an Aimpoint and 2-3x the cost of an ACOG. Not to mention about 3x as heavy. Are they great optics when more precision is needed? Sure, do they everything better? Not so much…again there is a cost involved and if they did everything better than everyone would have one. Neither the ACOG or RDS is going anywhere soon…and I’d bet in another 10 years there are still going to be more of them than there are Short-Dots or Premier 1-8x.
I also train with my gear and I am also a trainer and you can do quite well with a good low power variable. It has its weakness in akward positions but that is often over stated.
How can it be overstated?
No low power variables of today are not the same as those 10 years ago. We have made huge advancements in this area of glass.
What advancements are you talking about? Quantify them. Have there been improvements? Sure. Are they RDS/ACOG killers? Not so much.
I say this fully appreciating what the low-powered variables do, I’ve owned and still own them. They’re great optics but they don’t do everything well.
Sure like I said earlier now we have scopes that combine the following, day light visible reticle (red dot bright) with a BDC reticle with a true 1x on the bottom and magnificaiton as high as 8x on the top. There are only a handful of scopes that combine these features today and 10 years ago none did. The first scope to combine these was the Short Dot.
Link to article on Vickers site. http://vickerstactical.com/tactical-tips/short-dot/
While in my opinion there is still a place for small RDS sights like the T1 on pure CQB guns and as back up optics. Nothing beats a quality low power variable as a do all jack of all trades optics. I have used the following optic combinations in my years as a police officer and firearms trainer. Eotech, Aimpoint M4 with 3x magnifier, TA33 ACOG with T1 Aimpoint in off set mount, TR24 and a Swarovski Z6i. While there are some positions where the variables are harder to use compared to red dots, they do everything else as well and they do distance far better. That is my opinion based on using and training with these optics.
Also as to your question regarding the over statment of shooting from akward positions. Most officer involved shootings that I am aware of with patrol rifles take place at close range from the off hand position. Some have the officer using cover and kneeling or going prone. While there are times like int he LA bank robbery where the officers had to fire under a vehicle with the rifle canted these situations are not the norm. You seem to think that you will always be in a situation where you will have to be curled up in a ball on your side shooting the rifle canted. Hell when I went through basic sniper training back in 2007 I had no problem using my Nightforce 5.5-22x from urban prone under a barricade in the training. Yes its harder to use than a red dot in these positions but its not a deal breaker and if its that important to you put a back up red dot sight on your gun in an off set mount for those type of situations.
