View Full Version : Primary Arms 1-6x, 1-8x Variables
ArmedNovelist
02-02-17, 13:30
So, I'm looking into the Primary Arms line of either 1-6x or 1-8x variable power scopes. I plan on putting it on a 5.56mm Tavor SAR. I love the ACOG-esque reticle that's on it and I love the ability to go down to single-power when I don't need to see as well for longer ranges. but I've only had the chance to play with the 1-6x on one occasion. My primary worry is that if I get the 1-6x that I won't have enough in the way of long-range sighting.
Does anybody have either of the models and can share some insights?
Don't know about the 1-8, but I have looked through the 1-6. The glass wasn't that great for me or the guy who owned it, he sold it. I have personally gravitated toward a much more simple reticle that is daylight visible. I have come to the conclusion that better glass, not more magnification, is the ticket to better long range shooting (up to a point). 4X isn't going to allow me and my older eyes to shoot 2" groups at 400 yds. But I believe that 4X and much better glass are are going to allow me to hit 8-12" steel at 200-300 yds much faster. See the thread above about the Steiner 4PXi above. That's where I'm heading scope wise.
TacticalFun
02-02-17, 15:11
I have 2 of the Chinese 1-8 and 2 of the japanese 1-8. Its all i buy now for variable.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170202/2d896a9ca3071eb76779a2c2bb35f302.jpg
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
ArmedNovelist
02-02-17, 17:21
Don't know about the 1-8, but I have looked through the 1-6. The glass wasn't that great for me or the guy who owned it, he sold it. I have personally gravitated toward a much more simple reticle that is daylight visible. I have come to the conclusion that better glass, not more magnification, is the ticket to better long range shooting (up to a point). 4X isn't going to allow me and my older eyes to shoot 2" groups at 400 yds. But I believe that 4X and much better glass are are going to allow me to hit 8-12" steel at 200-300 yds much faster. See the thread above about the Steiner 4PXi above. That's where I'm heading scope wise.
The thing is that I'm looking for at least a 1-6x. I'll have to look and see if Steiner sells a similar model for a similar price.
I have their 1-6 and 1-8 ACSS scopes and love them for the price. I've run them hard and they've been great with no issues. The ACSS reticle makes these the best 1-8 for under $400 IMO.
For those saying the glass isn't good; it's a $300 scope, not a $3,500 Leupold Mark 8. I would argue the glass is pretty good for the price (and I spend a lot of time behind high end scopes). If you want really high quality glass in a 1-8, you will need to spend $1,200+. If you want a $369 1-8 with a very useable reticle that works great for the price and has decent glass for cheap, these are very hard to beat.
ArmedNovelist
02-02-17, 19:15
I have their 1-6 and 1-8 ACSS scopes and love them for the price. I've run them hard and they've been great with no issues. The ACSS reticle makes these the best 1-8 for under $400 IMO.
For those saying the glass isn't good; it's a $300 scope, not a $3,500 Leupold Mark 8. I would argue the glass is pretty good for the price (and I spend a lot of time behind high end scopes). If you want really high quality glass in a 1-8, you will need to spend $1,200+. If you want a $369 1-8 with a very useable reticle that works great for the price and has decent glass for cheap, these are very hard to beat.
Thank you. So, with the 1-8x, does the reticle become too large on the higher powers -- covering a lot of the target further out? That was one of the reasons the Strike Eagle didn't make the list, aside from it also not being 1-8x. And, of course, which one would you ultimately pick if you had to chose one (1-6x or 1-8x)?
Thank you. So, with the 1-8x, does the reticle become too large on the higher powers -- covering a lot of the target further out? That was one of the reasons the Strike Eagle didn't make the list, aside from it also not being 1-8x. And, of course, which one would you ultimately pick if you had to chose one (1-6x or 1-8x)?
It's a second focal plane, which means the reticle remains the same size throughout the magnification range.
The Platinum Series ($1200) 1-8 is a FFP.
Which model are you referring to?
ArmedNovelist
02-02-17, 21:36
It's a second focal plane, which means the reticle remains the same size throughout the magnification range.
The Platinum Series ($1200) 1-8 is a FFP.
Which model are you referring to?
I am referring to the SFP model. My complaint with the Strike Eagle was that the reticle lines were too think for my liking and tended to cover the targets that I usually use.
I have their 1-6 and 1-8 ACSS scopes and love them for the price. I've run them hard and they've been great with no issues. The ACSS reticle makes these the best 1-8 for under $400 IMO.
For those saying the glass isn't good; it's a $300 scope, not a $3,500 Leupold Mark 8. I would argue the glass is pretty good for the price (and I spend a lot of time behind high end scopes). If you want really high quality glass in a 1-8, you will need to spend $1,200+. If you want a $369 1-8 with a very useable reticle that works great for the price and has decent glass for cheap, these are very hard to beat.
Well, yeah, it's a $300 scope.....and that's precisely why the glass isn't so hot. But yeah for the price it's OK. Reticles are personal, if you like the ACSS reticle.....then it's for you.
A Toyota Camry is probably the best bang for your buck with an excellent warranty but it's no Charger Hellcat so that means it sucks!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A Toyota Camry is probably the best bang for your buck with an excellent warranty but it's no Charger Hellcat so that means it sucks!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nobody, including me, said the PA 1-6,or 1-8 sucks. But the OP asked for opinions. The fact of the matter is that the PA 1-6 wasn't as good as the Burris MTAC I'm working on replacing with a Steiner. We all have a budget and we work within our means. The problem with these less expensive optics is resolving power. When I shoot 3gun and I have to quickly try and pick out a 10" grey steel at 225 yds, the problem isn't so much that I don't have enough magnification, but that I can't pick out the steel from the background clutter. Everything is kind of fuzzy and indistinct. That's a lack of resolution. If your eyes are young, sharp and 20/20 like my 18 year old son, it's not nearly the problem it is for me.
I am referring to the SFP model. My complaint with the Strike Eagle was that the reticle lines were too think for my liking and tended to cover the targets that I usually use.
I have the 1-6 and I don't think the dot, donut it the NFC markings are too big. You can email PA and they will give you the details on how thick the lines are and such so you can decide.
No experience with the strike eagle, so I can't comment. However what kinds of targets do you use? This scope and reticle are not designed for precision work or bench rest group shooting. If you put up 1" pasters at 100 yds the dot will probably cover that. I'll see if I can dig up the PDF they sent me. AFAIK the scope and reticle are designed to get reliable hits onto a vital zone. Think being able to hit a 6" plate jiffy quick at various ranges.
Nobody, including me, said the PA 1-6,or 1-8 sucks. But the OP asked for opinions. The fact of the matter is that the PA 1-6 wasn't as good as the Burris MTAC I'm working on replacing with a Steiner. We all have a budget and we work within our means. The problem with these less expensive optics is resolving power. When I shoot 3gun and I have to quickly try and pick out a 10" grey steel at 225 yds, the problem isn't so much that I don't have enough magnification, but that I can't pick out the steel from the background clutter. Everything is kind of fuzzy and indistinct. That's a lack of resolution. If your eyes are young, sharp and 20/20 like my 18 year old son, it's not nearly the problem it is for me.
I apologize, I was just heading off where the conversation was eventually heading...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I apologize, I was just heading off where the conversation was eventually heading...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No prob bro. Man, I wish I could afford a Swarovski like some of the guys I shoot with! LOL
ArmedNovelist
02-03-17, 19:25
I have the 1-6 and I don't think the dot, donut it the NFC markings are too big. You can email PA and they will give you the details on how thick the lines are and such so you can decide.
No experience with the strike eagle, so I can't comment. However what kinds of targets do you use? This scope and reticle are not designed for precision work or bench rest group shooting. If you put up 1" pasters at 100 yds the dot will probably cover that. I'll see if I can dig up the PDF they sent me. AFAIK the scope and reticle are designed to get reliable hits onto a vital zone. Think being able to hit a 6" plate jiffy quick at various ranges.
I'm not looking for precision work, but I do more bench shooting than anything else. The reason for the pick was the reticle similarity to the horseshoe ACOG with an additional and wider power variance. Having been behind an ACOG a lot recently sent me on this optic excursion. I don't think that 4x is too much for the distances inside 100-yards; which means I could look at a 4-X FFP instead, but I haven't looked at that end of the stick. I'm worried about having too little available to me, really. Which is where Tom's issue about clarity comes more into play and is a valuable point.
I really love the ACSS reticle; it has tons of practical uses. I've got the PA 1-6 in a Larue LT 104 mount and really like the scope for what it is--a $300 scope. The glass is ok and fine for what I need. If you are wanting Uber precise bench shooting, look elsewhere. I like a variable optic on a MSR for occasional long shots, but mostly for target ID. This scope fits the bill.
Dionysusigma
02-05-17, 10:39
Anyone have any idea why PA has been out of the Platinum ACSS 1-8 for so long? I've finally built the rifle I'm intending to hang off the bottom of the scope (as it were), but 4+ months later I'm beginning to wonder if it's even still an option.
Vortex is coming out with the new PST Gen 2 line with a 1-6 and a street price of $6-700. I have more than one Vortex 1-6 Razor and the glass is awesome. But pricey..... rumored is the PST 1-6 will be close to the Razor in quality for less coin....
T
ArmedNovelist
02-05-17, 18:38
Vortex is coming out with the new PST Gen 2 line with a 1-6 and a street price of $6-700. I have more than one Vortex 1-6 Razor and the glass is awesome. But pricey..... rumored is the PST 1-6 will be close to the Razor in quality for less coin....
T
I do love a Vortex. If I wanted to go that route, I would do a 4-16x with an EBR-2B reticle in it. Unfortunately, the EBR-2s only come in the Razors unless I go to a 6-24 Viper PST... And, dammit, they are all expensive. I absolutely love their glass though. I wouldn't mind doing a PST, but they don't come with the reticle-style that I want (either an ACOG-esque or something similar to an EBR-2B). I'm coming to the conclusion that I may either just by an ACOG or looking towards something akin to the Razor, unless I can get more trigger time with a Primary Arms.
Mainelymark
02-05-17, 19:06
I was/am looking for a similar scope for a new (1st) AR. I had initially wanted a 3-9 or something in that range just because trying to find a well reviewed 1-6 or 1-8 in my price range ($350) was virtually impossible. What I have read in several different places is that the PA1-8 becomes quite blurry above its mid power setting. That, for me, was a complete turn off. Given that the higher power settings are used for distance shooting, having the blurriness all but makes the scope useless above 5 or 6 power. That being the case, you might as well have a 1-4. Which, for me, has less power than I want. I've read similar claims regarding the PA1-6, though not as many. I think I have found a sweet spot (for me). Burris has a Mtac 1.5-6x40 with an AR reticle. The only complaints I've read about the burris was that the original (and still available) CQ reticle was too large. The newer reticle is much more reasonably sized for shooting at a near to far distances.......or so I've read.
Mrgunsngear
02-06-17, 08:52
So, I'm looking into the Primary Arms line of either 1-6x or 1-8x variable power scopes. I plan on putting it on a 5.56mm Tavor SAR. I love the ACOG-esque reticle that's on it and I love the ability to go down to single-power when I don't need to see as well for longer ranges. but I've only had the chance to play with the 1-6x on one occasion. My primary worry is that if I get the 1-6x that I won't have enough in the way of long-range sighting.
Does anybody have either of the models and can share some insights?
My video below should help you out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVEQXVxi4A
I'm not looking for precision work, but I do more bench shooting than anything else. The reason for the pick was the reticle similarity to the horseshoe ACOG with an additional and wider power variance. Having been behind an ACOG a lot recently sent me on this optic excursion. I don't think that 4x is too much for the distances inside 100-yards; which means I could look at a 4-X FFP instead, but I haven't looked at that end of the stick. I'm worried about having too little available to me, really. Which is where Tom's issue about clarity comes more into play and is a valuable point.
Sorry i'm late responding. To your previous question, I have used the 1-6 with the little circle in the middle, and the 1-8 with the chevron in the middle. I prefer the chevron, and i haven't felt the reticle covers things at far distances, unless you want to shoot 1 MOA targets at 500 yards. It's definitely built as a combat reticle and not a precision reticle. And if you are shooting past 200 yards, you will be using the BDC hashes which are plenty thin.
As for the clarity etc, if you want the ACSS reticle in a much nicer scope with much nicer glass, get the PA Platinum 1-8. That has awesome glass, adjustable turrets, and the ACSS reticle. I've spent some time behind that scope and it is awesome. But it's also $1,200, so you're paying $800 more than the ones we're discussing.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.