1-4 Variable optic options

**EmanP** · 04-15-07, 16:11

I've heard a lot of people say that the S&B is a 90% solution. I'm curious, what would make it a 100% solution? Extended battery life? Smaller, lighter? Eye relief, no parallax?

And Grant, did you ever get a chance to reveiw those NF scopes?

**xenophobe** · 04-16-07, 15:26

Originally Posted by C4IGrant

Optics are a personal choice for sure and if it works for you then it works.

Absolutely. Optics need to be viewed and every individual will find that their personal preferences differ. No amount of what other people think will really justify how well something works for you.

Just with my binoculars, I've used several Swarovskis in various conditions as well as with Zeiss and Leica. I loved the Zeiss FL's as they did have the best image, but found they were too bulky and I personally didn't like the composite bodies, the Swarovski ELs just seemed too 'thick and heavy'. I was used to the size of the Zeiss 10x40 Classics, and the Leica 10x42 Ultravids fit my hands the best, I could hold them steadier, and they offered my eyes better color rendition than the Swarovskis. All three make the world's best binoculars, but when it comes down to it, the statistics and specs don't matter, what you actually prefer does.

**TimP** · 04-16-07, 15:31

Originally Posted by EmanP

I've heard a lot of people say that the S&B is a 90% solution. I'm curious, what would make it a 100% solution? Extended battery life? Smaller, lighter? Eye relief, no parallax?

And Grant, did you ever get a chance to review those NF scopes?

I think it has something to do with the $2000+ price tag

**VA_Dinger** · 04-18-07, 17:12

Originally Posted by TimP

I think it has something to do with the $2000+ price tag

That's the only negative to the Short Dot in my opinion.

**MerQ** · 04-18-07, 18:46

This is kinda random but I think the Short Dot with the Leupold SPR reticle would be pretty nice for those who feel the CQB reticle to be too cluttered. It would be nice if you could switch between both an illuminated dot or illuminated crosshairs with a switch too in an ideal world. I have been looking at the Leupold Mk4 1.5-5 SPR again since it was sunny today and sure enough it was hard to pickup the reticle at times. On top of that I think I rather have a 1x-4x scope or something close to it anyway but I really dig the reticle personally. It's simplistic yet still very functional.

**caporider** · 05-23-07, 10:59

Just took my first ever carbine class with Sully/Defensive Edge. It was very basic, so I don't claim any special knowledge or skillsets.

However, I did notice that I had a heck of a time going to a good cheekweld and sight picture on my IOR 1.1-4x26 while at the same time going fast. Oftentimes, I ended up shooting through a bad sight picture, which probably wasn't a big deal at 10 yards but did open up my groups at 25+ yards. It was also a PITA to sight through the scope while lying in nonstandard prone positions, since half the time I couldn't even get the stock up to my cheek. Shooting while moving was also a bit of a pain, since cheekweld and eye relief requirements are much higher for variable optics than they are for dot/holo optics. AND, the scope is significantly heavier than any of the dot/holo optics out there.

OTOH, I really liked being able to dial up 4x and put bugholes in targets at 25+ yards when shooting supported (kneeling, sitting, standard prone). And it was especially nice to have the magnification when we shot for distance (100 - 350 meters) at the end of the class.

How do you guys running low-power variable optics deal with all the above issues? I'm guessing training and practice (especially since I've seen pics of guys running 3-gun stages with variable optics), but I'm seriously considering an Eotech 557 with the 3x or 4x flip magnifier (I prefer the ring and dot to just the dot, and I like the holdovers) to remove cheekweld and eye relief issues at close ranges.

Any thoughts? Thanks.

**C4IGrant** · 05-23-07, 11:04

Originally Posted by caporider

Just took my first ever carbine class with Sully/Defensive Edge. It was very basic, so I don't claim any special knowledge or skillsets.

However, I did notice that I had a heck of a time going to a good cheekweld and sight picture on my IOR 1.1-4x26 while at the same time going fast. Oftentimes, I ended up shooting through a bad sight picture, which probably wasn't a big deal at 10 yards but did open up my groups at 25+ yards. It was also a PITA to sight through the scope while lying in nonstandard prone positions, since half the time I couldn't even get the stock up to my cheek. Shooting while moving was also a bit of a pain, since cheekweld and eye relief requirements are much higher for variable optics than they are for dot/holo optics. AND, the scope is significantly heavier than any of the dot/holo optics out there.

OTOH, I really liked being able to dial up 4x and put bugholes in targets at 25+ yards when shooting supported (kneeling, sitting, standard prone). And it was especially nice to have the magnification when we shot for distance (100 - 350 meters) at the end of the class.

How do you guys running low-power variable optics deal with all the above issues? I'm guessing training and practice (especially since I've seen pics of guys running 3-gun stages with variable optics), but I'm seriously considering an Eotech 557 with the 3x or 4x flip magnifier (I prefer the ring and dot to just the dot, and I like the holdovers) to remove cheekweld and eye relief issues at close ranges.

Any thoughts? Thanks.

Most 1X scopes are not really 1X, but mor like 1.25-1.50. The S&B is about the only one that I have found that is pretty close to a true 1X.

Practice plays a part in it though.

C4

**rhino** · 05-24-07, 00:38

Two questions:

1. Do you wear earmuffs or plugs?
2. Do you have fixed stock (A2, A1, Sully, etc.) or an adjustable?

These may not apply to you, but they might help if you're anything like me.

I can't use earmuffs with long guns. I can't get a decent cheekweld, and if I try to come close, I lose the seal on the muff on the stock side, which is not a good thing. When I switched to plugs, it really helped.

Another thing is that your stock might be too long. If you have an adjustable, try reducing the length a little and see if it helps.

If those don't apply, you might try moving the optic rearward a little to see if that helps as well.

Did you talk to Sully about it? If not, you might want to drop him an e-mail since he got to see your gear, your body, and how you shoot. He would probably have some helpful suggestions.

Originally Posted by caporider

However, I did notice that I had a heck of a time going to a good cheekweld and sight picture on my IOR 1.1-4x26 while at the same time going fast. Oftentimes, I ended up shooting through a bad sight picture, which probably wasn't a big deal at 10 yards but did open up my groups at 25+ yards. It was also a PITA to sight through the scope while lying in nonstandard prone positions, since half the time I couldn't even get the stock up to my cheek. Shooting while moving was also a bit of a pain, since cheekweld and eye relief requirements are much higher for variable optics than they are for dot/holo optics. AND, the scope is significantly heavier than any of the dot/holo optics out there.