AR Optics Theory

[ZA_Survivalist]

I just bought a Burris AR332 3x prism sight that I'm absolutely in love with. Highly effective out to 150.

That'll probably be one of my next optics as well.

 

[Longwalkhome]

My mistake has been to buy used thinking I was saving money. I bought Vortex from the guys here and feel like it was dumb buying other folks problems.

I stepped up to new and I am very happy with the Trijicon line of red dots and scopes. Expensive in my book but they work.

Buy once cry once.

 

[3MTA3]

If the role of this rifle includes defense then I'd suggest whatever optic gets a QD mount and you get decent BUIS like Troy or ARMS. I use Vortex Spitfires and Primary Arms Cyclops 1X prismatics, but don't compete.

I went with prismatics because you get an etched reticle if the battery dies and I have too much astigmatism for red dots or holographic sights. If you have family members that have astigmatism this may also be a consideration.

 

[titsonritz]

I went with prismatics because you get an etched reticle if the battery dies and I have too much astigmatism for red dots or holographic sights. If you have family members that have astigmatism this may also be a consideration.

Have you ever tried looking at a RDS thru your rear sight aperture? That will clean up the starburst effect and give a clean dot.

 

[P7M13]

@Hueco, have a Leupold Scout scope and a Burris Fastfire 3 you can borrow to try.
The scout scope has a really generous eye box and extremely fast acquisition.
I love the fastfire as a co-witness - even faster acquisition than the Leupy.

Preferences : 100 yards and under, not concerned with MOA groupings, co witness sights. Wanting to be more accurate and out to 200, scout scope. Beyond that, MIL/MIL FFP 4-16x50 or something similar.

For irons, I'd recommend determining whether you like the classic trident or HK ghost rings. I prefer the latter, but have and work with both.

To me there's a world of difference, trying something mounted to someone else's rifle vs on your own. Balance, ergos, fitment are all slightly different.
I tried a Burris prism on someone else's rifle. Thought it was great, bought one and found I *hated* it on all of my ARs. Gave it to my oldest.
I have two budget MROs (Truglo and some other) and find both 'meh.' They're sitting on the shelf.
I have a 2-7x scout scope that is heavy, and learned, for me, that 2x is the most magnification that I would want on an AR that is not equipped for DMR.

 

[titsonritz]

@Hueco
I have a 2-7x scout scope that is heavy, and learned, for me, that 2x is the most magnification that I would want on an AR that is not equipped for DMR.

I assume you mean 2X at the low power range? I'd rather have a 1-6X or even 1-4X. A LPVO by definition is a compromise, I want a true 1X to simulate a RDS.

 

[P7M13]

I assume you mean 2X at the low power range? I'd rather have a 1-6X or even 1-4X. A LPVO by definition is a compromise, I want a true 1X to simulate a RDS.

I mean, given the choice between more than 2x magnification, 2x, 1.5x like on my Leupold Scout, or co witness, for 50 yards or under, co witness is ideal. 1.5x to 100 or even 200 is great. Don't care for higher magnification on an AR in this use case.
Had to look up RDS since I don't keep up with acronyms.
As far as variable, most of the time my scopes are set somewhere close to their lowest magnification. Plus, I love the simplicity and clarity of a fixed power scope. Leupold, old Weavers and Simmons.
Last night doing a ladder test, put 50 rounds down range at 6x, also trying out a new-to-me scope on an AR10. Around the last five shots, realized I was at the lowest power, cranked it up to 24 - it was ridiculous - then back down to 9.

 

[titsonritz]

I mean, given the choice between more than 2x magnification, 2x, 1.5x like on my Leupold Scout, or co witness, for 50 yards or under, co witness is ideal. 1.5x to 100 or even 200 is great. Don't care for higher magnification on an AR in this use case.
Had to look up RDS since I don't keep up with acronyms.
As far as variable, most of the time my scopes are set somewhere close to their lowest magnification. Plus, I love the simplicity and clarity of a fixed power scope. Leupold, old Weavers and Simmons.
Last night doing a ladder test, put 50 rounds down range at 6x, also trying out a new-to-me scope on an AR10. Around the last five shots, realized I was at the lowest power, cranked it up to 24 - it was ridiculous - then back down to 9.

There are legit reasons for higher magnifcation with an AR. Positive Identification (PID) at longer ranges and precision at closer ranges...example: a threat 50 yards out with only half a head exposed and being able to plant one in the eye socket.

 

[monkeybutler]

example: a threat 50 yards out with only half a head exposed and being able to plant one in the eye socket.

Well, there's a level of detail I had never previously considered.

 

[P7M13]

There are legit reasons for higher magnifcation with an AR. Positive Identification (PID) at longer ranges and precision at closer ranges...example: a threat 50 yards out with only half a head exposed and being able to plant one in the eye socket.

I really don't think of it in defensive preparedness. Think more in close proximity coastal range woods, <2 seconds to acquire sight and get a shot off. Which is why, as my eyes have deteriorated, I practice more with irons. Don't need to see an eye to hit it, nor "see" the bullseye to hit the X. Good concept for reactive targets, though.
In reality, have gotten woefully behind in practice. Still have the accuracy potential, but the muscles, conditioning and speed ain't what they used to be.

 

[American123]

There are legit reasons for higher magnifcation with an AR. Positive Identification (PID) at longer ranges and precision at closer ranges...example: a threat 50 yards out with only half a head exposed and being able to plant one in the eye socket.

This has always been my laugh at folks who say, "see this hear red dot, I can shoot a man sized target out to 600 yards."

It's like, ok… so you are expecting them to be standing there completely broadside?

 

[Mr Smith]

primary arms 1-8x24 ACSS Raptor FFP would be my preference. With the scope lit up @ 1x it's about like an eotech. Then you can zoom to 8x to engage targets much further out. Gives ranging, doesn't need to be illuminated to be functional.

 

[PDX_Schmoogle]

primary arms 1-8x24 ACSS Raptor FFP would be my preference. With the scope lit up @ 1x it's about like an eotech. Then you can zoom to 8x to engage targets much further out. Gives ranging, doesn't need to be illuminated to be functional.

I haven't played with thw Primary Arms 1-8x, but if it's anything like the Leupold Mark 8 1-8x I'm sure it's very nice... But probably really heavy I think the Mark 8 with a mount is like 2lbs, pretty bonkers. That being said, it was a really nice set of glass.

 

[Mr Smith]

I haven't played with thw Primary Arms 1-8x, but if it's anything like the Leupold Mark 8 1-8x I'm sure it's very nice... But probably really heavy I think the Mark 8 with a mount is like 2lbs, pretty bonkers. That being said, it was a really nice set of glass.

They're about 1.6lbs with mount give or take a few oz depending on the mount you go with. An Eotech is certainly about half that weight, but you would need backup sights if the batteries ever died on you which would make up for the weight difference.. Don't need backup sights with a LPVS.

 

[USMC1911]

I really tried to like a LPVO but just find it rather useless for me and clumsy in a rifle that will seldom if ever see anything past 200 yards. I seem to be consolidating to 2 different optics on most any 223/5.56 I have and thats ACOG and Eotech. On any pcc or subgun its a reflex.

 

[mhayd93]

I really tried to like a LPVO but just find it rather useless for me and clumsy in a rifle that will seldom if ever see anything past 200 yards. I seem to be consolidating to 2 different optics on most any 223/5.56 I have and thats ACOG and Eotech. On any pcc or subgun its a reflex.

I had the same experience with a Trijicon Accupoint 1-4. Fantastic scope and on 1x was just like using a red dot sight. However, it added a lot of weight and made the rifle significantly slower to bring to bear. For an all-around 16" AR-15 in 5.56, I found it excessive.

I have an astigmatism so it's been a struggle finding a proper 1x sight. I tried a Vortex Spitfire; I loved the reticle but no matter how I adjusted the diopter, I could not get a clear sight picture with both eyes open (there was always a "double-vision" effect)!

I feel like my ideal optic would be a 4x ACOG? Is there any configuration where they come in at 16oz or less?

 

[Trunkmonkey]

The 4x ta-31 acog is like 9.9 oz with no mount and a Geissele mount is another 2.4oz. I think Midwest industries is also get weight. I also just peruse the light weight and rugged simplicity over the lvpo. They've definitely make lvpo's pretty rugged now. The primary arms Platinum 1-8 is made by light optics works in Japan and weighs 26oz and some change with no mount. It's basically 2lbs once you mount it. Some of the lightest good ones are going to weigh 22oz ish. That's almost double the acog. I don't really shoot over 200 yards though and if I did the scope might appeal to me more