I was just about sold on the Leupy, but you're giving me pause saying it's not ideal at the lowest setting. Is it truly not usable inside a house for HD?
I also like the P4Xi but it seems the Leupy has a bit of a better history of durability.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Member
I was just about sold on the Leupy, but you're giving me pause saying it's not ideal at the lowest setting. Is it truly not usable inside a house for HD?
I also like the P4Xi but it seems the Leupy has a bit of a better history of durability.
Senior Member
It's plenty usable at 1X inside but it isn't a true 1X. Few LPV scopes are. In a life or death situation in close quarters the handicap would be nothing close to what you are giving up not having a RDS.Originally Posted by grizzlyblake
Senior Member
I have one of these, also on an ADM AD mount. I decided to try it due to astigmatism issues. I've been very happy with it. And since it uses an etched reticle it will continue to work even if the battery dies or the electronics crap out. As far as Aimpoints go, I have one (ACO) but I have a hard time even getting a good zero with it because I can't tell where the dot ends and the burst begins. I'm really surprised there aren't more options for 1x optics with etched reticles. The only other one I'm aware of is the 1.5x ACOG.
I am able to use holographic sights like Eotechs just fine, but I lost confidence in them some time ago. I'm very curious to see the Vortex holographic sight in person.
Last edited by SteveL; 10-07-17 at 21:34.
Steve
Disclaimer: I am employed by Shadow Systems. My posts on this site are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer.
Senior Member
As a fairly new owner of astigmatism I'm starting to relate to many of you. I own 3 T-1's. My wife cannot use them so I put a TA-44 on her carbine and she's a credible shooter with it. I also find myself using a Trijicon 1-4 with the green triangle more and more as it's easy to use without the eye issues that get worse after an hour or so with an Aimpoint.
"The peace we have within us is most often expressed in how we treat others"
Senior Member
Grizz,
There are people who use fixed power optics for CQ and longer engagements. I have a friend who uses a 4x ACOG on his goto gun. For him he did train extensively so he knows how to use it in CQC or home defense. So even if 1x isn’t true 1x, say it’s 1.2x or even 1.5x, that is still very capable in CQC. I’ve used my 2.5-10 at 2.5x setting at about 20 yds and it is absolutely doable. By doable I mean I would definitely get kill hits on a threat.
So if you have access to a shoot house (you mentioned LEO) or a short range, then get your Leupold and train at those short distances so you can develop muscle memory on cheek weld and what your eye processes from the eye box and I believe you should be GTG. I don’t own a Leupold, but I run the same exact CQ drills with my Viper PST 1-4 (on a 12” SBR )as I do with my Aimpoint and EOTech at the range of 5-50m 60% of the time and 100m the rest. Maybe the only difference is I don’t ever use the dot on my EOTech, only the ring.
I also wear 1.25 glasses for reading. So I train without glasses A LOT. I also train with my contacts (pistol) and eye glasses. (Pistol & rifle)
I personally would not be put off by an optic that’s not a true 1x. That’s why we train.
IMO
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Texas has yet to learn submission to any oppression, come from what source it may."
~ Sam Houston
“The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution, are worth defending against all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks.”
~ Sam Adams
Member
The Mark AR is usable indoors... however, it's not ideal as I stated earlier. Owning both the Mark AR Mod 1 and the P4Xi and being able to compare side-by-side objectively, the Steiner has better/brighter illumination and is about as close to a true 1x as I've seen in an LPVO, which makes it much better suited for CQB situations and target-to-target transition than the Leupold. At the opposite end, the Steiner is also a little better suited for mid-range shooting thanks to thinner crosshairs at the central aiming point and a less cluttered reticle. The Mark AR's windage/elevation turrets are nicer in terms of tactile feel and visibility, but I personally prefer the P4Xi's capped turrets. Take that with a grain of salt because I use my AR's hard and set and forget the zero so I'm never dialing adjustments on this type of scope. The P4Xi also has better glass overall... its brighter in low light, has better color fidelity, and more edge-to-edge clarity. The magnification throw lever is a cool feature that I really enjoy using even though I'm not a 3-gunner or anything like that. All in all, the P4Xi is just a better optic in every way.
The Leupy's merits are basically all in size and weight. The weight factor is significant as the Mark AR is about half a pound lighter than the P4Xi and most other LPVOs in that price bracket. In the Aero mounts, it's a svelte little package. It does has a more forgiving eyebox at the highest setting than the P4Xi, but that's probably due to the more limited range of magnification, and the reticle becomes the handicap at distance instead of the eyebox, so call it a wash. And if exposed turrets are your thing, that could be a selling point for the Mark AR as well since they are definitely much more suitable for dialing adjustments.
In my experience, the P4Xi is actually more durable than the Mark AR, specifically the illumination knob. I'm not really a fan of Leupold's push button system, which can be sensitive and finicky. I have had issues with it in the past.
Member
I just sighted in a P4Xi on one of my rifles this weekend. I can echo 0uTkAsT's comments on the glass -- it has good clarity and color fidelity, and the brightness is downright excellent. The illumination is damn near Aimpoint bright. My only criticisms so far are that the turrets are annoyingly mushy, and that the eyebox is kind of small.
I've had the scope for less than a week, so I have no first hand knowledge of the durability.
Member
I'm considering one of the Vortex AMG UH-1 red dots next time I come up on putting glass on a carbine for this very reason. Aimpoints are nice, but the dot wasn't a dot for me.
Member
I still have yet to see one of these in person and I'm definitely curious about them, but I'm not expecting miracles either. EOTechs are actually worse than regular red dots to my eyes, so I don't expect the UH-1 to be much different.
Member
To me EO Tech's were grainy, but never starfire/balloon/penis/oblong like red dots have been.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks