AR optics

[Route 45]

My point is, Gross tonnage always Wins.

From Aircraft to the Ground Pounders, we were superior.
Sure a 70 year old bolt action rifle was able to kill a few Americans, But as Americans we brought with us far superior firearms into the fray.
Seems when we left a zillion M4's behind, they dumped those 91-30's and AK's an put our M4's to work.

Cool story, bro. But we're talking about rifle optics. Numbers of dead troops are not directly attributable to Holosun vs ACOG, etc.

 

[Creedmoor]

Cool story, bro. But we're talking about rifle optics. Numbers of dead troops are not directly attributable to Holosun vs ACOG, etc.

You're right again, it took a detour on post 26. I'll try not to let it happen again.

 

[Tombs]

I'll take either irons or a 4X ACOG before all of that out to at least 650.
If it has a battery, it needs to be in a flashlight.

When battery life is measured in decades, being battery powered becomes a lot less relevant.

Especially when going with a compM4 or compM5 where you're using AA or AAA respectively. (Which is the big plus to going with that series) It doesn't matter how much of the world has burned down, AA and AAA batteries will be around in quantities until the heat death of the universe, you'll also find them around the world, which can't be said for some of the button cell options.

I prefer magnification as well, but that isn't what the OP is asking for.

 

[gregr]

I wouldn't go into CQC on a $500 budget, but that's me.

You sound like you're asking for a serious use unmagnified optic. Aimpoint and Eotech are really the only players in that game. It really isn't that big of a spend in the grand scheme of things, even on a very modest budget. I'd be looking at a T2, compM4, or compM5.

If your goal is to shoot on the range and what-if a home invasion, then holosun will do well. The issue with holosun is one of manufacturing consistency, which is going to be the issue with anything in that price range. It costs a lot of money to make a perfect product every single time. You can save a lot of money by rolling the dice on QC and relying on warranties. It's just a question of if that use case is serious enough that a warranty isn't reassuring.

Sure, I`d love to have the greatest battle optic, but since the taxpayer isn`t supplying mine like they do for military and law enforcement, I have to do the best I can with the resources I have. It`s fiscal responsibility.

 

[gregr]

This is like an old school gun forum thread where folks throw out absolute statements and imply...do what I do unless you're a poor!

Good times.

To answer your question, I wouldn't trust a Crossfire to hold up but a PRO should be fine (and your gun is fine too).

Thank you, you said what I`ve been thinking. I keep hearing about how fantastic the Vortex warranty is, and that`s great, but the warranty is for something that has broken down, and doesn`t address something that just isn`t as high a quality in the first place as you want, or need. Aimpoint makes much better optics even than the Patrol Rifle Optic, but I can`t get to that price, and from the bit of research I`ve done, it sounds as if the consensus is that the PRO is dependable and tough enough to take the abuse that would presumably come with being used in a tough situation. I`m trying to do the very best I can with the very limited resources I have.

 

[gregr]

@gregr

This popped up in the classifieds.

WTS: - ***SOLD*** Aimpoint PRO

I am selling my Aimpoint PRO - new in an open box, never used. I'm asking $375; located on the south side of Indy (Greenwood), and I am available to meet anywhere in the metro area.

www.indianagunowners.com

I wish I had the cash to buy that. As it is, I have nearly have of the cost covered to get it off Amazon in Amazon gift cards. I hope to have the balance of Amazon gift cards by spring, but we will see. Retired and on a very fixed income...

 

[Kdf101]

If you like red dots, as in can see the dot clearly, the aim point pro is a solid choice. Reasonably affordable and solid quality.

 

[breakingcontact]

A good thing about buying a decent optic too, is it holds more value than a cheap one. Like that Aimpoint PRO listed for 400...that's within probably 50 bucks of what it sold for new.

 

[ISO400]

Not long ago, I purchased a Springfield Armory Saint Victor. Springfield was having a promotion at that time, and I also received a free Vortex Crossfire red dot optic. I`ve read reviews on that optic, and like I suspected, there are good as well as bad reviews. For an optic that has an MSRP of between $100 and $150, depending on where you look, the reviews are about what I expected to see. Apparently Vortex has an outstanding warranty and customer service.

I have wondered though if I might not want to sell or trade this and get a different optic for my AR. I have been considering an Aimpoint PRO if I were to go with a tube red dot, or, I have been seriously considering a holographic red dot of some sort because I feel that that type sight would have much faster target acquisition capabilities in CQC situations.

So, I`m just wondering what any of you might do in this same situation. Would you keep and mount the Vortex Crossfire, and trust that that quality of a sight would hold up and be sufficient? Would you pull the trigger on the Aimpoint PRO? Would you get one of the holographic red dots instead, and if so, what would be your holographic red dot of choice? Unfortunately, it will be a stretch for me to go to $500 for a rifle sight, but that would be my high end.

zeiss is always my first choice. a little more expensive than other brands but worth every penny

 

[Tombs]

Sure, I`d love to have the greatest battle optic, but since the taxpayer isn`t supplying mine like they do for military and law enforcement, I have to do the best I can with the resources I have. It`s fiscal responsibility.

The money is never gone, it'll be worth as much or more than the purchase price for years to come.

So trying to save a buck for fiscal reasons may end up in losing more money than you realize. This is how pretty much everything gun wise for me works out. If it has the curb appeal and is established, it's never going to be worth less than you paid for it.

 

[ZurokSlayer7X9]

Not a recommendation for the OP since it's out of the price range, but another vote for ACOG. Specifically the 3.5x35 model, which has a far better eye relief and field of view than the 4x32. Anyone I meet that's interested in an ACOG, I heavily recommend the 3.5 over the 4. The only downside is it is a little bulkier and heavier I believe than the 4x32.

LPVO's also get my vote and are currently my favorite. A 1-8 Strike Eagle on power 1 acts mostly like a red dot. Not as fast as an EoTech, but pretty dang close. You could clear a room with it with both eyes open, however the same optic is capable of making sub-MOA shots at 100 yds.

 

[firecadet613]

LPVO's also get my vote and are currently my favorite. A 1-8 Strike Eagle on power 1 acts mostly like a red dot. Not as fast as an EoTech, but pretty dang close. You could clear a room with it with both eyes open, however the same optic is capable of making sub-MOA shots at 100 yds.

Exactly this. Love the EOTech 512, but I'll be listing it shortly. No auto on kills it for me.

I'm a fan of the Romeo 5 and thanks to recommendations here, picked up the Strike Eagle 1-8 LPVO. Very hard to beat that at its $300 price...

 

[ZurokSlayer7X9]

Exactly this. Love the EOTech 512, but I'll be listing it shortly. No auto on kills it for me.

I'm a fan of the Romeo 5 and thanks to recommendations here, picked up the Strike Eagle 1-8 LPVO. Very hard to beat that at its $300 price...

Planning on getting another Strike Eagle, but want to get the FFP rather than the SFP. The FFP is nearly double the SFP though.

 

[Tombs]

Not a recommendation for the OP since it's out of the price range, but another vote for ACOG. Specifically the 3.5x35 model, which has a far better eye relief and field of view than the 4x32. Anyone I meet that's interested in an ACOG, I heavily recommend the 3.5 over the 4. The only downside is it is a little bulkier and heavier I believe than the 4x32.

LPVO's also get my vote and are currently my favorite. A 1-8 Strike Eagle on power 1 acts mostly like a red dot. Not as fast as an EoTech, but pretty dang close. You could clear a room with it with both eyes open, however the same optic is capable of making sub-MOA shots at 100 yds.

That model of acog does NOT have a better field of view than the 4x32. The TA11(3.5x35) you're referencing has a 29ft fov@100 while the TA31 (4x32) has a 37ft fov@100

Eye relief can pretty much be directly corelated to field of view. The shorter it is, the bigger the field of view is typically going to be, all else being equal. If you want massive eye relief, you have to sacrifice fov. Also the longer eye relief gets the smaller the apparent image is going to become, which is why you have a beautiful panoramic view with a TA31.

 

[ZurokSlayer7X9]

That model of acog does NOT have a better field of view than the 4x32. The TA11(3.5x35) you're referencing has a 29ft fov@100 while the TA31 (4x32) has a 37ft fov@100

Eye relief can pretty much be directly corelated to field of view. The shorter it is, the bigger the field of view is typically going to be, all else being equal. If you want massive eye relief, you have to sacrifice fov. Also the longer eye relief gets the smaller the apparent image is going to become, which is why you have a beautiful panoramic view with a TA31.

Yes you are indeed correct, I confused FOV with Objective lens. However I still think the 3.5x35 is more comfortable to shoot. Those extra 0.9 inches of eye relief make a difference and in me keeping both eyes open and getting on target faster.