Question for the crowd:
What optic would you run on a 16" OBR?
Considerations; close to medium distance. 15-300m.
At some point I’d like to go further out with it, when i find a longer distance range, but for now i foresee close to medium range.
I was considering the Elcan 1-4x, Leupold Mk 4 2.5-8x, or something else along those lines. Granted perfect world I’d like the new Leupold/Night-force 1.1-8x but they are not out yet…
Thoughts?
Thanks for the ideas!
Might find THIS helpful.
got it, lot of options out there!
You HAVE an OBR??? I am sooooo jealous!!!
Here’s a question. Looking at the pics in magazines, there doesn’t appear to be a lot of rail space on the sides or bottom. Could you possibly add a Crimson Trace Laser/ Light vertical foregrip?
Maybe I’m just not seeing it right as my experience w/ M4’s is VERY limited. Like next to none. Which is why I’m a member of M4C.net
NoSweat88
Try reading the information on the OBR website.
Ok…I’m officially embarrased. I’m sure it won’t be the last time.
Aimpoint M4 ‘S’, throw on a 3x magnifier if you want to really reach out and touch somebody.
Aimpoint RDS, Short-Dot, or larger SB like a 3-12 (or Zeiss/Hendsoldt).
Don’t waste your money on Leupold or NF unless all you shoot in is bright daylight. Before you spend large amounts of money on a scope try them out first especially in low light situations like dusk and dawn. There a HUGE difference between performance when the lights “go out”. Also look at things like optical clarity at both the edge of the scope, and towards the center. Check out the build quality, how easy is it to zero the optic, etc. There are also a lot of little differences not often shown.
Night force works great in low light thank you very much. In fact both my Nightforce scopes excell in low light. Nightforce is known for having great low light capability.
Pat
WASTE money on NF…:eek:
If NF glass is a WASTE of money…and NF is a bad performer in low light, I guess you do have the “nuts” after all…
Anything short of Hubble ownership tends to make your statements regarding NF a little mind pondering…but hey we all have a view and that is yours. Mine is the mere opposite, and while I only own the 2.5-10 x 24 and x32 models…i have found the LIGHT, NF has gone way beyond my expectations and I have never read a bad piece on them besides yours.
The U.S. NAVY Seals called and want to know why they have been using silly lil NF glass when there were so many better options out there for them.
Thankfully they still have an aimpoint to pop on for “serious” work
Ive done side by side comparisons between my NF, and other glass such as my Short-Dot. At dusk the Short-Dot is way brighter. Where I had trouble even seeing the target with the NF the target was very easy to see with the Short-Dot. Ive had other people do the same thing, and they all say the Short-Dot is clearer, and brighter under the same conditions.
Overall the build quality is much better with higher end European optics. They are build to a higher quality standard, are tougher, and down to the little details they are better scopes. I paid $1400 something for my NF, and the turrets feature painted on hash marks, the click adjustments are sloppy feeling in comparison, the illuminated reticle doesnt work during the day, optical quality is not as good, etc. Other little issues like bare metal on the illumination knob. The focus adjustment is ancient technology. I had an old Weaver scope made sometime around the 60’s that focused in the same manner as my NF.
Ive shot with other Euro optics like Hensoldt, Zeiss, Swaro, and used Leica equipment. They all make much better optical equipment than American brands like Leupold, NF, Nikon, etc. Go ask a REAL professional photographer what they think of Leica cameras if they’ve used them. Go ask professional bird watchers what spotting scopes are the best. The ones who are REALLY into it are using European brand spotting scopes. Its not uncommon to see them with 10k just in optics.
Im not an optic snob but there is a clear difference. Obviously spending 2-3k+ for a scope is out of most people’s budget. But when you are talking about almost $1500 for a NF when you can get a Short-Dot or other similar optic for a little over 2k Id rather spend the money, and get a much better optic.
Fine the SEAL’s use NF scopes. The Marines have been using Schmidt and Bender PMII scopes for a few years now, and from all accounts they are very happy with them. Lots of other countries use SB scopes along with Zeiss/Hensoldt.
NF is a decent scope don’t get me wrong. They are just not in the same league as the top Euro brands. They are good competition for Leupold or other companies like that. If all I had to spend was the price range NF was in they would be my 1st choice.
If you don’t believe me that there is a good bit of difference I was just out shooting with Paul (RetreatHell), and had him compare them side by side during dusk. He has a NF too, BTW. We set both scopes on 4X, and were looking at a black steel target 100 yards away. Where the target through the NF was very dark, and hard to make out against the dark dirt berm it was in front of…the Short-Dot had much more clarity, contrast, and brightness. It was easy to see the target. Looking through the NF things looked much darker than with the naked eye. The Short-Dot was close to being as bright as the naked eye.
To each their own…
I own a Swarovski z6i and two Night forces. Nightforce scopes are excellent in low light. Are they the equal in everyway of S&B and Swarovski no. But they don’t cost as much either. They are excellent optics very capable of low light work.
Pat
I have heard the Swaro’s are great optics but have never seen one in person so I can’t comment but I have owned a NF 1-4 and currently own a Short Dot LE . The NF is a great sight but in no way compares to the Short Dot in terms of optical clarity, lack of chromatic aberration, FOV and more forgiving relief at 4X. Sorry. We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one.
PS-After re-reading PoPos post I think we are closer on this than apart in terms of opinion. My mistake.
I hear ya and I respect that opinion of yours:) The only thing I had an issue with was the waste of money thing.
Hence the keyword “unless”.
I think its pretty obvious the Short-Dot has much better low light performance, and compared to the NF 1-4 it has a lot of features the NF does not.
Locking turrets.
You can adjust zero without any tools besides something like the rim off a case, nickel, quarter, etc. NF requires a small allen wrench, and uses set screws.
Short-Dot in 1.1X shoots very close to an Aimpoint. You can actually do drills at short range with it, and its not too much different. The NF illumination is not daytime visible so if you try to shoot it like an Aimpoint during the day all you will see is a black reticle.
Focus adjustment is “idiot proof” on the Short-Dot. The NF uses very old methods to adjust focus, and much harder to do on the fly.
Short-Dot has BDC turrets or you can just the regular hash marks.
Overall quality is quite a bit higher. Hash marks, and all other markings are laser engraved on the Short-Dot. The NF is painted on. Turret click adjustments are very precise on the Short-Dot, and and comparison the NF feels “gummy” almost. The NF is still better than quite a few others though.
The NF scopes the SEAL’s use are not available commercially. The ZeroStop mechanism is different than commercial models, and they go through additional testing commercial scopes do not. If you buy a Schmidt and Bender you are getting the same scope as mil units are getting. The same testing, mechanical movements, etc. You can go buy the exact same scope that is sold to the USMC for example.
European scopes tend to be “over engineered”, and are built very tough. Everything from the tube thickness, general quality, mechanical movements, etc. There is a reason the Short-Dot is very heavy. Scopes like NF, and Leupold tend to be built “lighter”. Like the set screw turret caps, Zero Stop, turret wall thickness, etc.
European scopes tend to have very good “eye boxes” which means you don’t have to put your head in one exact spot to get a clear picture. With my NF you barely move your head position, and you lose a clear sight picture. With my Short-Dot I can do drills, rapid fire, etc, and I never lose sight picture. With the NF 1-4 you can’t even use it like an RDS because the illumination is not day time visible, and you would quickly lose a good sight picture do to the small eye box.
And again the cost is not something that is for everyone, and there are plenty of good scopes out there. For me when you count in how much the total cost of all this is…the cost difference is not all that much. A more recreational shooter probably will not realize the difference or at least see it as a benefit worth the extra cost. Just like a ameteur photographer will never see the difference between a 1k dollar Canon or Nikon vs. a 10k Leica camera system. If I were paying 3k for an OBR, the ammo cost, the range fees, making good use of the OBR and its accuracy, (ect) Id like to have a very good scope like a Short-Dot. I have mine on a Stealth 16", and its a perfect match to both do drills with, and get great accuracy that the platform is capable of.
Also the new 1.1-8 Short Dot coming out later this year would go great with a 7.62 weapon, and it has a method to get TRUE 1X power to be used like an RDS which no other variable magnified optic is capable of. The 8X top power would make better use the 7.62’s power at range. Currently there are no scopes that get a true 1X power. They all have a slight fish eye effect at 1.1 which is why I say they are close to an RDS which really is 1X. The new Short-Dot will have the ability to operate just like an RDS.
The only diff. b/t navspec NF and regular NF is 10-12 additional test hours are put into each navspec unit…I have never heard about the diff. design of the z-stops.
eta…curiously, you have left out durability and overall robustness to the scope in discussion about dainty lil euro scopes…I will take a NF in the dept without question over anything I have personally owned, or tried.
Thats fine. Im just giving my opinion after using several brands of scopes. The NF will work perfectly well for quite a few people, and I never said it was not a decent scope. They are just not in the same league at the top Euro brands is all. And again if I were paying several thousand dollars for a rifle, and all the accociated costs of shooting the gun, becoming proficient with it, ammo, travel, etc the cost of the scope isn’t all that great in the long run. To me its about matching the capability of the gun with the optic as Ive always believed a gun is only as good as the peice of glass that is on it. Id rather it be me being the limiting factor of getting the most out of a particular setup than the equipment Im using. If you wanted to do CQB drills, and had a NF scope it would be much harder compared to a Short-Dot. If you tend to shoot at dusk or other low light situations most Euro scopes are much brighter during these conditions. Much of this had to do with how Europeans hunt, and they do a lot more night hunting than Americans. The scopes had to evolve over time to meet the shooters needs. In the US night hunting is generally considered taboo, and only for varmint hunting which has a lot priority.
I like my NightForce, though the ZeroStop is a bit of a pain, the wrench thing.
Which ‘‘EuroOptic’’ is superior, the Ziess or Swaroski? Ziess makes a nice varipoint like, but no mildot stuff.
This being said, I’m looking for a scope for my .308 LMT. Out to say 600y. I’m either going to go with a Zeiss varipoint, USO 1.8-10x or NightForce 2.5-10x. I think I may be overkilling the zoom however. I like the Mildot the USO and NF offer, Zeiss doesn’t really offer that. I see most Zeiss optics as more hunting/CQ than longer ranges.
Yea all the way to 300 yards. Magnifiers on RDS sights are not a long range solution. They are a 300 yard at best optic. No BDS no way to dial easily.
Pat