View Full Version : Optics for Self Defense and CQB: My thoughts and experiences
Posted this on another site and thought it might have some relevance here (I compiled my experiences with several different optics from posts that I had made on several different boards and put them into a single post for a member on another site):
Newby here --
Wondering what holographic sight I should use on a flat top AR15 carbine for self-defense?
Thanks!
Xxxx,
If you could define your needs a little better, it would narrow down the options.
By self defense, I'm going to guess that the place you are most likely to use an AR15 is in defense of your home.
For a home defense carbine I would suggest a simple carbine with iron sights and a white light. This is not the "coolest" answer, but it is probably one of the most practical.
Most guys don't deal with violent criminals on a daily basis and often times on the internet posts like this often generate more responses that are based on "theory" rather than responses that closely follow circumstances that a armed civilian is likely to find himself in.
That being said, I see a lot of threads like this, and most of the responses are based on theory and best case scenerios. Any fighter (boxer, soldier, cop, civilian defending themselves) should always train for the worst case scenerio, not the best case. As the saying goes, prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
If as an armed civilian you are unlucky enough to be the intended victim of a violent crime, you are most likely going to be involved in a defensive or reactive fight, not an offensive fight. The criminal, much like an animal of prey will pick the intended victim, the date, the time, and the place for the attack.
As a victim of a violent crime, you will almost always find yourself dealing with the situation on the criminals terms. You will be reacting to his actions. As is proof in the OODA loop, actions are always quicker than reactions.
If a criminal kicks in your front door to committ a home invasion robbery, he isn't going to sit in the front living room like a prom date and wait for you (the victim) to turn on your optic, put on your multi-cam plate carrier, and get ready for the fight. He is there it dominate you and to control you and to get what he wants (steal something of monitary value, take a human life, exact revenge, etc) In most cases you are barely going to have enough time to roll out of bed and grab your gun (much less turn on an optic, mess with a sling, insert a mag and chamber a round, etc) before the bad guy is in the same room as you. Crimes like this happen VERY quickly.
Sorry for the rant, but these are things you may want to consider prior to deciding if an optic is the best route.
Here are my experiences with several different optics in a close quarters battle enviornment. Most of these are responses to other posts, but you may find some of the information useful:
Trijicon Reflex I & II
The first time I had a "wash out" (ie. where you can't see the aiming dot because you don't have proper contrast between lighting / target / illuminated aiming dot) problem with the Trijicon Reflex was in 1998 on a SWAT call. It was a no knock drug raid, in one of the back bedrooms I encounter a gang banger who is wearing a long white shirt. He won't comply with my commands and is slightly bladed to me, I can't completely see his right arm / hand.
The house is extreemly dark, all the windows are covered and the only ambient light in the entire house is coming from the television in the front room.
I have a Surefire 9v classic weapon mounted light illuminating the suspect. I'm looking for the dot, I can't find it. The bad guy complies and we take him into custody.
As we are searching the rest of the rooms, I use the light intermitenly, turing it off and on. When the light is off I can see the dot perfectly, when it's on if the light is on a dark object like a black or dark blue bed sheet I can see the dot fine. If the light is illuminating a white or light colored object like a wall, etc. I can't see the dot as the white light on the light colored object washes out the amber dot.
I also tried the Reflex II and had the same problem. I was also using the Polarizing filter on both Reflex sights. The filter is like putting a pair of sunglasses on your optic but it gave more contrast and I could see the dot better (until I ran into the problem noted above).
The Reflex technology is over 10 years old and there are so many better optics on the market today.
Trijicon Accupoint TR21 (1.25-4x)
I used the Trijicon Accupoint 1.25-4x with a red triangle (TR21R) on a duty gun for a short period of time. I shot matches and did some training with it as well as taking it on calls at work. While I didn't care for this optic on 1.25x because it slowed me down too much for my preference at CQB distances.
I really liked this scope on 1.5x - 4x.
On 1.25x the scope had too much eye relief (I'm a nose to charging handle shooter) even in a LaRue SPR-E with the LaRue mount as far forward on the flat top as possible and the scope mounted as far forward as it would go in the scope mount.
There was some distortion that I couldn't get use to on 1.25x. The best way I could describe this distortion is, it is like looking through a bubble.
I did have a problem with the reticle washing out a couple times in the dark using a white light. It didn't completely wash out, but the lit reticle was dim, thus making it harder to locate in a hurry.
If using the TR21 to shoot longer distance, the reticle under the triangle is 3 bold vertical lines that can completely cover the target, thus making "hold over" difficult to impossible.
Trijicon ACOG (TA01NSN, TA31, TA11....3.5x and 4x)
An ACOG would not be my choice for using on a CQB mission. When I first got a TA31 ACOG I used it for matches and became fairly proficient with it at rifle matches (3 yards to 425 yards), and after a short learning curve I felt comfortable using it at CQB distances.
I started using the TA31 at work and after my first couple SWAT missions, I quickly figured out that a 4x fixed optic was more of a liablity than an asset.
A 4x optic is very slow and doesn't afford the shooter a good sight picture or the ability to identify threats at CQB distances (concentrates on too small of a target area).
Often times when SWAT does an entry, both you and the bad guy are moving, it's dark, and you are using a white light, flash bangs are going off, you are trying to identify theats, dogs are so shitted they are either trying to get out of the house or trying to attack officers, there are people in the house that are not involved with the criminal activity (relatives or assoicates of the bad guy) etc, etc.
Doing CQB drills with an optic on a square range is quite different from using that same optic while doing a real world entry on a house with real suspects inside that would like to do you harm.
Trijicon TA31 + Doctor Optic Red Dot (TA31DOC)
I was considering the TA31 + JPoint / Doctor Optic set up, but that set up was the exact opposite of what I needed.
On the ACOG + DR Optic set up your primary optic is the ACOG and the Dr Optic is more of a back up in case you come across a target that is at CQB distances.
In my job approximately 75% of the work is at CQB distances and the other 25% is at longer ranges. I needed an optic that more geared toward what I do most.
Aimpoint and EO Tech
(non magnified electronic red dot optics)
I have been using the Aimpoints prior to the XD models coming out (since around 1999 or 2000).
I attend several tactical carbine classes, shoot in matches, and have taken several Patrol Rifle and SWAT carbine courses. I have yet to see an Aimpoint go down.
On the other hand I have seen several EO Tech's go down (they were all prior to the Rev F). I have also seen several fall off guns. I know of at least 3 different Officers who had their EO Techs go down DURING a SWAT call out.
I don't like dropping names, but Pat Rogers and several other trainers have witnessed the same problems with EO Techs (check the posts in the 2001 - 2004 timeframe on http://www.tacticalforums.com for further info).
That being said, the Rev F has been out for a couple years, I have seen several in classes, matches, etc. and have never seen one fail.
I highly recommend both the Aimpoint or the EO Tech (Rev F). Both are extreemly durable. The deciding factor comes down to your personal preferences. I find the controls on the Aimpoint easier to operate with glove on or when your fingers are extreemly cold, the battery life is in the 10,000 to 50,000 range (EO Tech has a battery life in the hundreds of hours depending on which model you get), both EO Tech and Aimpoint have night vision models, with the Aimpoint if the sight goes down you can use the tube as a large ghost ring at CQB disances, etc, etc, etc.
I don't care for the reticle on the EO Tech (pixilated), the buttons, the auto shut off feature, the battery life, etc. These are just *my* personal preferences. I highly recommend the EO Tech or the Aimpoint.
If you go with an Aimpoint, I perfer the 4 MOA dot instead of the 2 MOA dot. The 4 MOA dot is easier to see under extreemly bright conditions (sun reflecting off the snow). Some guys get wrapped around the axel about precision shots with a 4 MOA dot. This is a non-issue because at 300 yards the dot is only 12" in diameter, not big enough to cover a man's chest. At distances over 300 yards you are going to be holding over the target, so you don't have to worry about the dot covering up your target.
I have been using the Aimpoint on entries for the last 6 or 7 years in all types of conditions.
Leupold MR/T 1.5-5x vs. Short Dot 1.1-4x
I have both the S&B Short Dot and the MR/T M2 1.5-5x.....Both are excellent glass.
The main advantage the Short Dot has over the MR/T M2 is that it has an illuminated electronic red dot. This was a one of the prerequisites that I had when I was looking for a low powered magnification scope for SWAT work.
If you aren't going to be kicking doors, the MR/T 1.5-5 with SPR reticle is an excellent choice. The only reason I bought my Short Dots is because I didn't feel comfortable kicking doors with the MR/T.
The SPR reticle is extreemly quick at CQB distance targets (ie. daytime CQB stage at a rifle match), just put the big round circle on the target and press the trigger. The glass on the MR/T M2 is exceptionally clear, the reticle is very precise at longer distances. Down side is you can not see the lit reticle during the day.
2 weeks ago I was out shooting steel gongs (18" - 24") at 450 yards with the MR/T, the bullet drop comp dial works as advertised.
I have noticed that I can get tighter groups with the MR/T than I can with my Short Dots or ACOGs. This is due to both the reticle and the higher 5x magnification.
I experience very little occulation with the MR/T, it has generous eye relief, the SPR reticle is very quick on close targets at 1.5x and the inner portion of the of the reticle is fine enought to get very precise shots out past 500 yards because the reticle is thick enough to see, but not so thick that it covers up the target.
Is the S&B better glass? Yes, but at almost 3x the price. Does the S&B have better features? Depends on what you are using it for.
For almost 1/3rd the price, and for your intended use, the MR/T is probably the best bet.
I would not use the Leupold MR/T for home defense or on an entry gun.
Leupold CQ/T 1-3x14mm
It depends on your application. A lot of competition / 3 gunners use them and really like them. The glass is not bad, just doesn't have a lot of features that lends it's self to being a good optic for *most* military / police / tactical applications:
-On 3x the eye relief is extreemly short (about the width of my index finger),
-the field of view is like looking through a straw,
-the reticle is not visible during day light hours,
-at 3 yards the large circle is touching the "C" on an IPSC target (ie. it's almost too large to be practical),
-it's long and heavy (8.8", 17.5 oz),
-mounting options suck (unless LaRue starts making a mount for them again), the amber lit reticle sucks
-etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.
In short, for my application LEO / SWAT, I don't care for them.
For more info read my responses on page 3 (screen name USMC03)
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=290997&page=3
_________________________________________________________________
**From another post**
My responses are listed in BOLD Red text below your quote.
Originally posted by SMGLee:
Jeff,
Always agree with everything you said except on this CQT issue.
Nothing wrong with having a differening opinion, based on first hand experience. If we all agreed all the time, this internet thing would get boring rather quickly :beer:
the eye relief is short but not any shorter then the ACOG 4x.
I was running our Department Quals on the rifle range 2 weeks ago. We have over 200 sworn officers on our Dept. and only 1 of them carries a CQ/T. While this Officer was at the range I used his CQ/T to get familiar with it again, as it's been 18 - 24 months since I last had any trigger time on one.
On 3x, I measured the distance from my eyebrow to the scope. It was the width of my index finger.
I have owned several ACOGs (TA01, TA01NSN, TA31s, and TA11s).
The eye relief on the TA01, TA01NSN, and TA31 is listed as 1.5". Measuring with my fingers the eye relief is the width of my index AND middle finger. For me the eye relief is noticeably more with the ACOGs.
The eye relief on the TA11 is 3" - 3.5". I'm sure you were probably refering to the 4x ACOGs.
FOV is actually better on the CQT then it is on the short Dot. at least at 1X.
I was refering to the FOV on 3x, it reminds me of looking through a straw. On 1x the CQ/T has a wide field of view, I can remember seeing the handguards on the Officer's rifle.
it is true about the poor illuminating reticel and low battery life. but Short dot has about the same low life on the batteries but at least you can see the illumination during the day.
Opinions, applications, and mission statements differ. As I stated above: "The glass is not bad, just doesn't have a lot of features that lends it's self to being a good optic for *most* military / police / tactical applications."
For the square range there is nothing wrong with a non-illuminated reticle, or a reticle that can't be seen during bright day light, with use of white light, etc.
For people who are operating outside the controlled enviornment of a square range, an illuminated reticle that can be seen under all conditions can be more of a "need" than a "want".
A couple examples of this is:
-Consider going up a stair well with your CQ/T a bad guy has on dark colored clothing. You and a couple other members all have your 9 volt surefire lights aimed in on him. He won't listen to commands. You can't find your reticle because the lights are bright enough to wash out the illuminated reticle and the black reticle is blending in with his clothing. This happened to an Officer I know who use to use the CQ/T.
-Often times, when it's bright outside bad guys, like cockroaches, like to hide in dark areas (barricaded gunman inside a dark house, suspect hiding in a salvage lot under a pile of wrecked cars, under a sheets of plywood leaned up against a fence, in a dark secluded breezeway, etc). If you under the bright sun light in the middle of the day and the suspect is in a dark area, you may not be able to see the reticle as the sun light will wash out the illumination and it's extreemly difficult / sometimes impossible to see / find a black reticle against a dark background.
mount does suck.
At least we found some common ground ;)
but as long and heavy, it is no longer and heavier then a Short dot that cost a lot more.
I should have been more articulate. For what it does, the CQ/T is long and heavy.
If a piece of gear has outstanding performance and desireable features I will tolerate a little extra weight or bulkyness. Other optics are on the market that are close to the same features as the CQ/T that are light, smaller, have more magnification, have more features, and have more eye relief.
To compare the a $700 CQ/T to a $2,000+ Short Dot is much like comparing a $20,000 Saturn to a $50,000 Mercedes Benz. They are not really in the same class. With the Benz, you are paying more for attention to detail and performance. The same applies to optics.
I wasn't trying to compare the two. If you read the www.ar15.com thread above, a guy on that site stated that the they were basically the same, but the CQ/T just cost less. There was a long discussion about the CQ/T in that thread, and that is why I posted a link to it. Sorry for any mis-comm on my part.
the Long tube is require to reach a true 1x unlike the Short dot which is about as long and it is actually a 1.1x.
The CQ/T is extreemly close to 1x, but it is not a true 1x like an EO Tech or Aimpoint. Look at the front sight post next time you look though a CQ/T and you will see some slight distortion cause by slightly more than 1x magnification.
then again.. no one really makes a ture to life 1X there is always some varations. but CQT is the closest to a true 1X.
Disreguard my last.....I concur
It is indeed ugly....and the damn rail on the tube.
_________________________________________________________________
More info on the CQ/T:
Gear selection is based on mission statement and personal preference. If you gear doesn't work when you need it to, it hinders you ability to proficiently complete your mission and come home safely.
I'm not saying that the CQ/T is a bad optic. Leupold marketed it toward the military / tactical community and in my opinion the CQ/T doesn't have a lot of features that lends it's self to being a good optic for *most* military / police / tactical applications.
I think a lot of the complaints you hear about the CQ/T comes from military guys and cops. Many 3 gun, IPSC, competition shooters love the CQ/T. If Leupold had marketed the scope to a different crowd or given it a different name, I don't think you would hear as much chatter about it. Just my 2 pesos
US Optics SN4 1-4x
-1x, not a true 1x. Can see some distortion of the front sight post. Probably more like a 1.1x
-Illuminted reticle can not be seen during the day light
-The factory mount sucks (Can be changed for a superior mount like the LaRue Tactical mount)
-Field of view reminded me of looking through a straw
-Head position had to be just right, but eye relief was adequate
-Optic was overly long and heavy for what it offered.
-I was very slow at close distances with this optic.
Overall I wasn't too impressed with the SN4 as a CQB optic.
Schmidt and Bender Short Dot
Over the years I have been in search of the "perfect" optic.
In a SWAT setting 75% of the missions are CQB and the other 25% can range from permiter work, to overwatch on a VIP detail, to searching large warehouses or schools, etc.
SWAT missions can often be dynamic in nature. One minute you can find yourself on a permiter trying to see if the barricaded gunman standing in the window has a gun or a cell phone in his hand, and the next minute you're being picked up as part of the entry team. On other missions you may find yourself sitting across a large parking lot covering a buy / bust operation, the bad guy goes mobile and now your part of a vehicle take down.
In short there are times where an electronic red dot rules the day and other times where a magnified optic is more desirable.
I have tried magnifiers, a few variable powered optics, etc, etc, etc. I had issues with everything that I tried.
A couple requirements that I have in any optic that I use for duty:
-Lit reticle that can be seen in bright day light (this knocked out some optics like the MR/T M2 1.5-5)
-Very little distortion on the lowest power (this knocked out most optics that had the lowest setting at 1.25x and higher)
-Have close to the same speed with the optic as I did an Aimpoint.
I have tried most of what is on the market and after doing much research (thanks to the Lightfighter members who took the time to answer my many questions) I settled on the S&B Short Dot and after training with it for the last 6+ month I'm very satisfied with it.
The Short Dot gives the end user amost the same capabilities as an Aimpoint and an ACOG in one optic.
As with any new piece of gear there is a learning curve.
I haven't used a shot timer, but I would guess I'm somewhere between 80% to 85% as fast with the Short Dot as I am with the Aimpoint. For me this is acceptable, because there has to be a trade off.
The Aimpoint is a good CQB optic that can be used out to 300 yards +
The ACOG is a great intermediate optic 50 yards out to 600+
The Short Dot is a combo of both of these, so there is going to have to be a trade off somewhere.
I'm looking forward to running it through the paces at some upcoming rifle matches (CQB distances out to 450 yards) and classes.
I did explore the Aimpoint magnifier. I didn't care for the field of view (reminded me of looking through a straw) and it just didn't "do it" for me.
In theory the magnifier would be an excellent choice, in reality it's not. Sometimes events can be so dynamic and situations can happen so quickly that you don't have time to fish around in a pouch for a magnifier, locate it, and then put it on the gun. Or if I had the magnifier in a pouch on my SWAT vest and I rolled on a bank robbery in progress, active shooter incident, etc. and had to deploy the carbine and didn't have a chance to don my SWAT gear then I'm without the magnifier.
I needed something that stayed on the gun and was easy to use. This is the reason you see so many military and law enforcement guys going over to variable powered optics.
Is the Short Dot the "Be all, end all" optic? No. But it is currently the best choice for *my* needs in an optic. My shooting needs are different than the needs of a Deputy working in a rural county, a Soldier / Marine deployed to the GWOT, a competition shooter or a civilian who will be using his carbine for self defense.
Access your *real* needs and get the best gear that helps you fulfill your mission statement.
_________________________________________________________________
In short for a civilian using the AR15 as a home defense gun, I would highly suggest iron sights with a large rear ghost ring style sight like the Same Plane Rear Appeture made by XS Sights and a large tritium front sight post like the Big Dot or simular front sight post also made by XS Sights and a quality white like.
The light should be ergonomically placed on the carbine where it is easy to access with the support hand on the handguards.
If an optic is desired I would go with a non-magnified electronic red dot like the Aimpoint or the EO Tech. My presonal preference is with the Aimpoint and it's what I've used on duty for the last 7 - 8 years.
Take care and stay safe,
Semper Fi,
Jeff
Too bad theres a very vocal group on the internet with ZERO real world experience or training for that matter that will doggedly argue your well thought out logic.
Good post bro.
I have been a Aimpoint/EOTech proponent and fan for some time now, with my preference being the Aimpoint. If one has an A1 or A2 upper, then an XS same plane app. is a must have. I am still not 100% sold on the big dot front though. I am still pondering that.
What I am still trying to figure out is a slightly lower cost equivalent of the Short Dot. While I think they are excellent optics etc., I personally just cant spring the $$ for one. I wish there were a vible alternative for a bit less change.
I wish there were a vible alternative for a bit less change.
NF said they were changing their reticle illumination in their optics. They wouldn't commit to a timeline. :mad:
I opted for the Short Dot, after much consideration of my checkbook......:(
Good stuff Jeff, thanks for taking the time to write this.
This will definetly help me get people into the right optic.
FlyAndFight
04-05-07, 16:57
Thanks for the very detailed examination based on your experience. Truly appreciated.
Great post, I love reading actual user experiences of equipment and not just internet anecdotal "evidence."
I, being a regular civilian until I finish my second degree and find a job somewhere in law enforcement, chose to outfit my personal defensive carbine with an EOTech. I figure, for my limited defensive needs, it should more than suffice. Good to hear someone with much more experience agrees! :)
Jeff,
Do you feel to get the benefit from the Short Dot that you have to have the dot always illuminated? Are there any situations where you would employ it without it illuminated?
Nathan_Bell
04-05-07, 18:52
Great write up, this type of quality work is why Al Gore invented the internet:D
Jeff,
Do you feel to get the benefit from the Short Dot that you have to have the dot always illuminated? Are there any situations where you would employ it without it illuminated?
I don't run the illumination when I crank up the magnificiation. The dot covers too much of the target at longer distances.
CQB = Dot ON
Distance = Dot OFF
Semper Fi
Jeff
What kind of battery life do you get with it on all the time for CQB?
Approximately 100 hours
Semper Fi
Jeff
I knew it was low compared to an EoTech, but I had no idea it was that low.
Any idea how battery life compares with other variable powered illuminated optics, e.g., Leupy 1.5-5X, NF 1-4X, IOR?
I knew it was low compared to an EoTech, but I had no idea it was that low.
Any idea how battery life compares with other variable powered illuminated optics, e.g., Leupy 1.5-5X, NF 1-4X, IOR?
None of those are daylight visible though.
If you think about it the 100 hr life is not that bad. Thats at least 3 days. Even then the batts are small enough to carry a few and not even notice it until you need them.
None of those are daylight visible though.
If you think about it the 100 hr life is not that bad. Thats at least 3 days. Even then the batts are small enough to carry a few and not even notice it until you need them.
I thought the Leupy SPR reticule was daylight visible, but I'm not up to speed about the others.
About the battery life, I've seen tons of threads where one of the main discriminators between EoTech and Aimpoint is 1,000 hours vs 50,000 hours. So if it's important at that level, I just don't understand why 100s (or 10s) of hours are acceptable for variable powered optics. Or is the protocol for variable powers to run them with the power off and only activate it when it's necessary?
At least with a variable you have a reticule available, albeit it's black. But if the illumination is what sets it above other conventional optics, then I would think the standard protocol would be to run them with illumination switched on all the time, at which point you are dealing with swapping batteries every couple of days. Just doesn't sound very desirable to me. There must be some additional features/benefits associated with variables that are so completely shit hot that folks are willing to overlook or tolerate the short battery life issue.
With an Eotech or Aimpoint the reticule is the illumination so you have no option, but their circuitry is such you get decent battery life -- months to years worth.
Leupold MR/T 1.5-5x vs. Short Dot 1.1-4x
I have both the S&B Short Dot and the MR/T M2 1.5-5x.....Both are excellent glass.
The main advantage the Short Dot has over the MR/T M2 is that it (Short Dot) has an illuminated electronic red dot. This was a one of the prerequisites that I had when I was looking for a low powered magnification scope for SWAT work.
If you aren't going to be kicking doors, the MR/T 1.5-5 with SPR reticle is an excellent choice. The only reason I bought my Short Dots is because I didn't feel comfortable kicking doors with the MR/T.
The SPR reticle is extreemly quick at CQB distance targets (ie. daytime CQB stage at a rifle match), just put the big round circle on the target and press the trigger. The glass on the MR/T M2 is exceptionally clear, the reticle is very precise at longer distances. Down side is you can not see the lit reticle during the day.
2 weeks ago I was out shooting steel gongs (18" - 24") at 450 yards with the MR/T, the bullet drop comp dial works as advertised.
I have noticed that I can get tighter groups with the MR/T than I can with my Short Dots or ACOGs. This is due to both the reticle and the higher 5x magnification.
I experience very little occulation with the MR/T, it has generous eye relief, the SPR reticle is very quick on close targets at 1.5x and the inner portion of the of the reticle is fine enought to get very precise shots out past 500 yards because the reticle is thick enough to see, but not so thick that it covers up the target.
Is the S&B better glass? Yes, but at almost 3x the price. Does the S&B have better features? Depends on what you are using it for.
For almost 1/3rd the price, and for your intended use, the MR/T is probably the best bet.
I would not use the Leupold MR/T for home defense or on an entry gun.
Everything is give and take. You have to give up one thing to gain another. I am NOT as fast with the Short Dot as I am with the Aimpoint. BUT....I am giving up a little speed on the low end so I can have the magnificiation.
If I wasn't kicking doors, I most likely have not purchased the Short Dot.
In my line of work 75% of the missions are CQB and the other 25% can range from permiter work, to overwatch on a VIP detail, to searching large warehouses or schools, etc.
SWAT missions can often be dynamic in nature. One minute you can find yourself on a permiter trying to see if the barricaded gunman standing in the window has a gun or a cell phone in his hand, and the next minute you're being picked up as part of the entry team. On other missions you may find yourself sitting across a large parking lot covering a buy / bust operation, the bad guy goes mobile and now your part of a vehicle take down.
100 hours is not all that great, BUT.....it's about give and take. I'll put up with the short but acceptable battery life in order to see the electronic red dot in all lighting conditions (bright sun light, white light, etc).
It all comes down to *your needs*. Target / threat identification is very important in my line of work. A guy who uses his rifle for self defense may not have the same as a Law Enforcement Officer / Military.
Semper Fi,
Jeff
Everything is give and take. You have to give up one thing to gain another. I am NOT as fast with the Short Dot as I am with the Aimpoint. BUT....I am giving up a little speed on the low end so I can have the magnificiation.
If I wasn't kicking doors, I most likely have not purchased the Short Dot.
In my line of work 75% of the missions are CQB and the other 25% can range from permiter work, to overwatch on a VIP detail, to searching large warehouses or schools, etc.
SWAT missions can often be dynamic in nature. One minute you can find yourself on a permiter trying to see if the barricaded gunman standing in the window has a gun or a cell phone in his hand, and the next minute you're being picked up as part of the entry team. On other missions you may find yourself sitting across a large parking lot covering a buy / bust operation, the bad guy goes mobile and now your part of a vehicle take down.
100 hours is not all that great, BUT.....it's about give and take. I'll put up with the short but acceptable battery life in order to see the electronic red dot in all lighting conditions (bright sun light, white light, etc).
It all comes down to *your needs*. Target / threat identification is very important in my line of work. A guy who uses his rifle for self defense may not have the same as a Law Enforcement Officer / Military.
Semper Fi,
Jeff
Jeff,
Reading through this, I can definitely see why it works for you. I'm not knocking the Short Dot, I'm just trying to evaluate the features, benefits and limitations of what's available and making a proper choice for my needs. That being range days and defense within the home and my property. I don't envision pulling perimeter duty or kicking down a door and having to quickly acquire the meth head with the SKS on the other side.
I'm presently using an EoTech. I'm considering for my next build a Leupy CQT or Prismatic, or maybe a Burris Euro 1 - 4x.
Stay safe.
Roger that. As I said, if I didn't have a specific set of *needs* for my work, I most likely would have never purchased a Short Dot. Great optic, but it's not the "end all, be all" optic.
Take a hard look at the Leupold MR/T 1.5-5x M2 or the ACOG TA11 over the CQT. You'll thank me later ;)
Semper Fi,
Jeff
Negative on the ACOG.
The Leupy is a possibility, but scope + mount is creeping up above more than I'd like to pay. You know, some of us just aren't made of money like you SWAT cops!;)
I recently had an opportunity to shoot the Short Dot at small targets from 400-700 yards. Target size was in the range of 10x12 (close) - 14x18" (far).
I found that at these distances and target sizes, it was hard to get a sight picture with the Short Dot (dot off) due to reticle clutter. And when I had to hold wind over 1 mil (most of the time in NM wind), it was basically impossible to see the target behind the reticle.
-z
I'm not really that surprised given the low mag power and the distances you were shooting. That's asking a bit from a low powered optic, regardless of mfg.
I think the same issue would rear its head while using reticle holdover on smallish practical targets (like we shoot at the Pueblo Rifle Match).
Repeating the same exercise with a 3-12x50mm PMII (ETA: at 4x of course) gives much different results, since the thin mil-hash reticle does not obscure the target.
But I agree this is kind of out of the regular usage model.
-z
Anyone tried the Bushnell 1x32 with lighted T-Recticles ? It sort of looks like an ACOG.
http://www.bushnell.com/images/products/73-0132P.jpg
Or maybe the smaller Bushnell
http://www.bushnell.com/images/products/73-0134.jpg
http://www.bushnell.com/images/red_green_dot_reticles.gif
Great post USMC03!
Always good to read what someone who's used a LOT of stuff in the line of duty thinks as opposed to guys like me, who may have a couple of the toys in their safes, but can only tell you what they think of them from our grueling hours on a covered bench rest... ;)
jim
Great post USMC03!
Always good to read what someone who's used a LOT of stuff in the line of duty thinks as opposed to guys like me, who may have a couple of the toys in their safes, but can only tell you what they think of them from our grueling hours on a covered bench rest... ;)
jim
Yes! Very well put. :)
I agree with much of what you said, especially using magnifiers on Aimpoints and EOTechs (though of course I haven't tried the EOTech magnifier), and your opinion of the CQ/T is spot on. A lot of the other stuff I haven't had much experience or time with or haven't scrutinized. I'm wondering why this post isn't stickied.
Anyways, thanks for the run down. It isn't often you get to read about so many different optics from one person's viewpoint. Good Job and excellent post... Be safe!
Great post! Just the kind of info I was looking for and especially coming from someone that has to trust their life to their equipment. It's posts like this and guys like you that make this the great site that it is.
I have to think that your choice of optics for a home defense rifle/carbine would depend to a great degree on how good you are at planning.
If you have a perimeter warning system of some kind (alarm system, dog, tin cans and pebbles on a string, whatever), a planned response to an intruder, and have in fact practiced that plan until everyone involved is reasonably comfortable with it and knows what to do and where to go (even while half-asleep), you might be able to get away with an optic that requires some sort of activation (e.g. Eotech) or some semblance of conscious thought (e.g. anything with a lit or unlit reticle that requires cheekweld and eye placement). The early warning and the practiced plan MAY give you the seconds you need to OODA loop the threat even if you have the extra step of activating or acquiring a reticle thrown in.
However, if you just have a rifle or carbine sitting by your bed, your shooting consists of banging steel plates at the local range and an annual deer hunt, and you're depending on your innate Spidey-senses to be able to fight with your weapon in the few seconds between the heart-stopping shock of hearing an intruder burst into your home and having the intruder on top of you, your only option is a constant-on red dot that requires no activation and is completely insensitive to cheek or eye position - as long as you can see the dot and the dot is on the target, you will hit the target. I think irons are a no-go in this situation because aligning the sights may be too fine a motor skill to ask for in the time available. Obviously, any optic that requires time to activate or acquire is also a no-go.
Personally, I think the second scenario is just a recipe for disaster, but if you're going to squeeze off a round or two while semi-conscious and scared sh*tless, the optic of choice would have to be an Aimpoint. I suppose you could leave an Eotech on all the time if you were diligent about replacing the batteries every couple of weeks or so, but that would require planning...;)
I have to think that your choice of optics for a home defense rifle/carbine would depend to a great degree on how good you are at planning.
If you have a perimeter warning system of some kind (alarm system, dog, tin cans and pebbles on a string, whatever), a planned response to an intruder, and have in fact practiced that plan until everyone involved is reasonably comfortable with it and knows what to do and where to go (even while half-asleep), you might be able to get away with an optic that requires some sort of activation (e.g. Eotech) or some semblance of conscious thought (e.g. anything with a lit or unlit reticle that requires cheekweld and eye placement). The early warning and the practiced plan MAY give you the seconds you need to OODA loop the threat even if you have the extra step of activating or acquiring a reticle thrown in.
However, if you just have a rifle or carbine sitting by your bed, your shooting consists of banging steel plates at the local range and an annual deer hunt, and you're depending on your innate Spidey-senses to be able to fight with your weapon in the few seconds between the heart-stopping shock of hearing an intruder burst into your home and having the intruder on top of you, your only option is a constant-on red dot that requires no activation and is completely insensitive to cheek or eye position - as long as you can see the dot and the dot is on the target, you will hit the target. I think irons are a no-go in this situation because aligning the sights may be too fine a motor skill to ask for in the time available. Obviously, any optic that requires time to activate or acquire is also a no-go.
Personally, I think the second scenario is just a recipe for disaster, but if you're going to squeeze off a round or two while semi-conscious and scared sh*tless, the optic of choice would have to be an Aimpoint. I suppose you could leave an Eotech on all the time if you were diligent about replacing the batteries every couple of weeks or so, but that would require planning...;)
You'd better be already lying awake with your eyes degunked and focussed in that scenario. Because if you think you're going to be able to be awakened, get up, get eyes focussed and/or glasses on and get your weapon ready in a timely fashion, that's a tough scenario.
I'm wondering for a pure house defense gun where ranges would be 25 yds and closer, whether or not a XS Big Dot front sight would be the ticket?
You'd better be already lying awake with your eyes degunked and focussed in that scenario. Because if you think you're going to be able to be awakened, get up, get eyes focussed and/or glasses on and get your weapon ready in a timely fashion, that's a tough scenario.
I'm wondering for a pure house defense gun where ranges would be 25 yds and closer, whether or not a XS Big Dot front sight would be the ticket?
Kinda what I was saying, except you said it better.
As for using any type of irons, going to a cheekweld and aligning the sights is tougher and takes longer than putting a red dot on a target. Eliminating the need for front sight focus also makes it much easier to keep both eyes open, and much easier for cross-dominant eye shooters (like me) to get a fast sight picture.
I had read USMC03's post on another forum and totally agree with all that he says. I would add one thing, a good quality red or green laser on a Home Defense Weapon. If you have only enough time to grab up your rifle and not enough to turn on an Eotech, you can always light them up with the laser. This will especially be useful if your eyes haven't yet focused from waking up. Just a thought.
greywolf2112
07-23-07, 22:54
Anyone tried the Bushnell 1x32 with lighted T-Recticles ? It sort of looks like an ACOG.
http://www.bushnell.com/images/products/73-0132P.jpg
Or maybe the smaller Bushnell
http://www.bushnell.com/images/products/73-0134.jpg
http://www.bushnell.com/images/red_green_dot_reticles.gif
I just recently got one of the smaller Bushnells for about $65.
Pros: Inexpensive, seems to be built decently, I like the choice of reticles, and the green/red.
Cons: Much smaller tube to look through than an Aimpoint or, my favorite, the EOtech. Don't know about toughness - seems like it couldn't take a pounding, I'm sure battery life is pretty weak (CR2032 battery).
But for the price (including 2 30mm rings for mounting) it is good for plinking.
I just recently got one of the smaller Bushnells for about $65.
Pros: Inexpensive, seems to be built decently, I like the choice of reticles, and the green/red.
Cons: Much smaller tube to look through than an Aimpoint or, my favorite, the EOtech. Don't know about toughness - seems like it couldn't take a pounding, I'm sure battery life is pretty weak (CR2032 battery).
But for the price (including 2 30mm rings for mounting) it is good for plinking.[br]
I too was looking at these. Went to Cabelas.com and read some reviews on it. Users there said changing the reticles changed the impact point. Anyone have any experience with this?
Thanks for the posts everyone.
Heavy Metal
07-25-07, 21:45
I suppose you could leave an Eotech on all the time if you were diligent about replacing the batteries every couple of weeks or so, but that would require planning...
And you would have to turn it on every 4 or 8 hours as the EoTech has a time out feature.
4 for down arrow on and 8 for up arrow on.
Jeff you are the man
I bought a AIMPOINt After talking to Chuck S. back around 7 years ago
And just love it! (updated to ML2 w/ 4moa)
It was mounted on my A1 carbine with GOOSENECK
But now the aimpoint/larue canti sits on my Defender 2000 14.5
SOPMOD,KAC RAS,KAC VFG, surefire,arms 40Lsp
I do like my Aimpoints to sit closer to FSB compared to my M4 defender
I also Have a Spare Bushy/VLTOR with LMT 14.5 M4 upper
I went with a EOTECH 551 1moa with circle
The Aimpoint To me is just Better made! Better water proofing and batt life and doesnt have several screws like My Eotech 551
I also shoot the same size groups with Both Carbines
I plan on buying a 1-4 Myself to REPLACE my 551Eotech
Ive been looking all over for several weeks
Still dont know? I keep comeing back to accupoint tr21 best bang for the buck as Grant states . and I did on the OTHER Forum.
I know I dont want a ILLUM reticle that wont work in the FL sun
is there any 1-4 that work in the bright sun that cost under 600 bucks
Too bad the VX3 LEU 1-5 wont do it
Very informative post Jeff, thank you. As some time has passed since you first penned some of your thoughs I have a follow up question. With the Larue pivot mount for the Aimpoint 3x magnifier, what do you think now of the comparision between a Short Dot and the Aimpoint combo?
Might find this interesting:
Fighting Carbine Optics - A Short Guide (http://demigodllc.com/articles/fighting-carbine-optics-short-guide)
Very informative post Jeff, thank you.
As some time has passed since you first penned some of your thoughs I have a follow up question.
With the Larue pivot mount for the Aimpoint 3x magnifier, what do you think now of the comparision between a Short Dot and the Aimpoint combo?
UPSguy,
I wrote the info posted above approximatley 18 months ago, at the time I purchased my S&B Short Dot's the (spring 2006), the LaRue pivot mount (#LT649) was not avalible on the civilian market. The thing that "turned me off" to the 3x magnifier (prior to the introduction of the LaRue pivot mount) is that the 3x magnifier had to be put on the gun or removed from the gun as needed. I needed an optic that stayed on the gun at all times.
***************************************************************
This was my though on the 3x magnifier prior to the release of the LaRue PIVOT mount:
In theory the magnifier would be an excellent choice, in reality it's not. Sometimes events can be so dynamic and situations can happen so quickly that you don't have time to fish around in a pouch for a magnifier, locate it, and then put it on the gun. Or if I had the magnifier in a pouch on my SWAT vest and I rolled on a bank robbery in progress, active shooter incident, etc. and had to deploy the carbine and didn't have a chance to don my SWAT gear then I'm without the magnifier.
I needed something that stayed on the gun and was easy to use. This is the reason you see so many military and law enforcement guys going over to variable powered optics.
***************************************************************
That being said, I have mentioned in conversations with friends over the last few months that the x3 Aimpoint Magnifier + LaRue Pivot Mount (#LT649) may be a good alternative for the S&B Short Dot (depending on the mission).
For me, 75% of my missions are CQB and the other 25% can range from permiter work, to overwatch on a VIP detail, to searching large warehouses or schools, etc.
I have used Aimpoint's in one form or another since 1999 - 2000, and still use them on a regular basis.
I recently received a LaRue Pivot Mount (#LT649) and will be getting a 3x Aimpoint magnifier in the near future. I am hoping this will be a good option for someone who wants to use the Aimpoint as their primary optic, but needs magnification from time to time. I'll post my thoughts on the Aimpoint + 3x Aimpoint magnifier in the LaRue Pivot mount once I get a 3x magnifier.
-Jeff
For a home defense carbine I would suggest a simple carbine with iron sights and a white light. This is not the "coolest" answer, but it is probably one of the most practical.
I've been pooped on for having this philosophy for my HD carbine. :)
UPSguy,
I wrote the info posted above approximatley 18 months ago, at the time I purchased my S&B Short Dot's the (spring 2006), the LaRue pivot mount (#LT649) was not avalible on the civilian market. The thing that "turned me off" to the 3x magnifier (prior to the introduction of the LaRue pivot mount) is that the 3x magnifier had to be put on the gun or removed from the gun as needed. I needed an optic that stayed on the gun at all times.
***************************************************************
This was my though on the 3x magnifier prior to the release of the LaRue PIVOT mount:
In theory the magnifier would be an excellent choice, in reality it's not. Sometimes events can be so dynamic and situations can happen so quickly that you don't have time to fish around in a pouch for a magnifier, locate it, and then put it on the gun. Or if I had the magnifier in a pouch on my SWAT vest and I rolled on a bank robbery in progress, active shooter incident, etc. and had to deploy the carbine and didn't have a chance to don my SWAT gear then I'm without the magnifier.
I needed something that stayed on the gun and was easy to use. This is the reason you see so many military and law enforcement guys going over to variable powered optics.
***************************************************************
That being said, I have mentioned in conversations with friends over the last few months that the x3 Aimpoint Magnifier + LaRue Pivot Mount (#LT649) may be a good alternative for the S&B Short Dot (depending on the mission).
For me, 75% of my missions are CQB and the other 25% can range from permiter work, to overwatch on a VIP detail, to searching large warehouses or schools, etc.
I have used Aimpoint's in one form or another since 1999 - 2000, and still use them on a regular basis.
I recently received a LaRue Pivot Mount (#LT649) and will be getting a 3x Aimpoint magnifier in the near future. I am hoping this will be a good option for someone who wants to use the Aimpoint as their primary optic, but needs magnification from time to time. I'll post my thoughts on the Aimpoint + 3x Aimpoint magnifier in the LaRue Pivot mount once I get a 3x magnifier.
-Jeff
The Aimpoint+3x solution did not work out for me because I do not have perfect vision. The Aimpoint reticle is a bit fuzzy, and that's OK at CQB distances, but throw the 3x on there and the reticle blooms out - in fact, to my eyes the reticle through the 3x looks like a dogbone, not a dot, and it's kind of hard to aim if you don't know what part of the dogbone actually indicates POI. My vision is 20/40 uncorrected, so it's not like I'm blind without glasses, but the 1-4x scopes with diopter adjustments work better for me over a wider range of distances.
Thanks Jeff, will be looking forward to an update down the road.
Caporider, I have noticed the same thing.
Thanks for the great review.
I own a Eotech 512 Rev F. a Leupold Mark 4 1.5-5x20mm MR/T M2 and I just
got an Aimpoint ML3 w. LaRue cantilever mount.
The MR/T M2 also has a LaRue mount and I'm extremely happy with all three of these optics. All 3 have slightly different uses but I feel my money was well spent.
I have some friends I consider reliable and trusted advisors and thankfully I have not wasted money on optics.
BTW . I purchased a CQ/T when I was waiting for my XCR to arrive and I ended up returning it because so many people told me that I'm gonna hate it because of the reasons the OP posted. That would have been a huge mistake if I would have kept it.
Great information Thank You
Spurholder
02-01-08, 13:17
USMC03,
Thanks for posting this very informative thread.
For several years I have been trying to find the "perfect optic" for work. I needed something that was very proficient in a CQB enviornment (non magnified electronic red dot) and something that would give me some magnification for situations that took place at longer distances.
In setting in which I work, 75% of the missions are CQB and the other 25% can range from permiter work, to overwatch on a VIP detail, to searching large warehouses or schools, etc.
SWAT missions can often be dynamic in nature. One minute you can find yourself on a permiter trying to see if the barricaded gunman, standing in the window has a gun or a cell phone in his hand. The next minute you're being redirected to be part of the entry team. On other missions you may find yourself sitting across a large parking lot covering a buy / bust operation, the bad guy goes mobile and now your part of a vehicle take down.
In short there are times where an electronic red dot rules the day and other times where a magnified optic is more desirable. But there is almost never the time or opportunity to take one optic off the gun and replace it with another while in the middle of a mission.
2 - 3 years ago I had the opportunity to get a small amount of trigger time on a Aimpoint M3 with 2 MOA dot and Aimpoint 3x magnifier.
As I recall the Aimpoint M3 was in a standard LaRue Aimpoint Mount (#LT-150, not the cantalever version) and the Aimpoint 3x Magnifier was either a LaRue standard Aimpoint mount or night vision mount.
Due to the way the Aimpoint and 3x Magnifier was setup, I remember having to move my head to the rear on the stock to get the proper eye relief, and thus wasn't in my natural shooting position (head was too far to the rear on the stock).
The one thing that sticks out in my mind about the 3x Magnifier after using it (in the setup mentioned above) was that I didn't care for the field of view (reminded me of looking through a straw) and the 3x Magnifier just didn't "do it" for me.
In theory the magnifier would be an excellent choice, in reality it's not. Sometimes events can be so dynamic and situations can happen so quickly that you don't have time to fish around in a pouch for a magnifier, locate it, and then put it on the gun. Or if I had the magnifier in a pouch on my SWAT vest and I rolled on a bank robbery in progress, active shooter incident, etc. and had to deploy the carbine and didn't have a chance to don my SWAT gear then I'm without the magnifier.
I needed something that stayed on the gun and was easy to use. I needed an optic that I could go from no magnification to 3x, 4x, or 5x while on the move in a second or two seconds at the most. Thus the magnifier was not an option for me.
Fast forward a couple years. LaRue Tactical releases their 3x Magnifier Pivot Mount (LT649), which keeps the 3x Magnifier on the gun, but has the ability to move the 3x magnifier into the same viewing plane as the Aimpoint (ie. Aimpoint ML3 + 3x magnification) or move it out of the viewing plane, so the shooter is looking through just the non-magnified Aimpoint.
The ring portion of the LaRue Pivot Mount is a rotating spring loaded design that rotates the 3x magnifier out of the way of the Aimpiont (to the 2 o'clock position) simply by grabbing a hold of the magnifier, pull it back toward your face, and rotate to the right. Once the LaRue Pivot Mount gets to the 2 o'clock positoin, it automatically locks into place and the 3x magnifier is held in the 2 o'clock position and the shooter then can use the unmagnified Aimpoint.
I have been shooting the S&B Short Dot for the last couple years, but had been using Aimpoints since the late 90's. The only down side to my Aimpoints is that they lacked magnification.
I have a lot of law enforcement / military guys contact me and ask my opinions on different optics. Many of them have the simular mission statements as me and have simular likes and dislikes. The Short Dot is hard for many to afford due to it's price. And there aren't a lot of other options on the market if magnification + an electronic red dot (that can be seen under all lighting conditions) is needed.
A couple months ago I ordered a LaRue 3x Magnified Pivot mount and an Aimpoint 3x Magnifier.
I mounted the LaRue Pivot Mount / 3x Magnifier behind an Aimpoint ML3 (2 MOA dot) in a LaRue cantalever mount on my Colt LE6920.
I have shot this set up from 50 yards out to 425 yards. Just last week I shoot 100 rounds at the steel gongs at my local range at 425 yards, conditions were cold and windy. With just a little hold over, it was extreemly easy to engage the gongs at 425 yards.
Some observations of the Aimpoint ML3 + 3x magnifier:
-The 3x Magnifier in the LaRue Pivot Mount would be a good duty set up as it give you non magnified electronic red dot to 3x magnification on the fly
-Very clear glass
-Generous eye relief (2" - 2.5")
-Wider field of view than I remember (close to the field of view on my Short Dot at 3x
-The 3x magnifier can be taken off the gun when no needed to save weight or make the carbine more mission specific
-In a recent phone conversation with Pat Rogers, Pat brought up the fact that the 3x Magnifier can be removed from the gun and used as a monocular
-A single 3x Magnifier can be used on several different guns set up with Aimpoints or EO Techs
-3x Magnifier assists with threat and target identification
-3x Magnifier is much more economical than something like the Short Dot
-Noticed my groups at 50 and 100 yards were much smaller ;)
-The 3x Magnifier can be brought into the viewing plane or moved out of the viewing plane with the support hand in approximatley 1 second while on the run.
In closing, I am very impressed with the Aimpoint 3x Magnifier in the LaRue Pivot Mount and will be using it for work. The Aimpoint 3x magnifier is definately another tool in the tool box.
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/Colt6.jpg?t=1202675673
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/Colt7.jpg?t=1202675695
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/Colt5.jpg?t=1202675715
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/Colt4.jpg?t=1202675734
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/Colt3.jpg?t=1202675759
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/Colt1.jpg?t=1202675800
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/Colt2.jpg?t=1202675785
S/F,
Jeff
Aimpoint 3x Magnifier directly behind the Aimpoint ML3
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/IMG_0039a.jpg?t=1202738341
Aimpoint 3x Magnifier flipped to the right side (2 o'clock), out of the way of the Aimpoint ML3
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/IMG_0040a.jpg?t=1202738850
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/IMG_0042a.jpg?t=1202738874
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/IMG_0056a.jpg?t=1202738891
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/IMG_0057a.jpg?t=1202738913
S/F,
Jeff
Aimpoint 3x Magnifier directly behind the Aimpoint ML3 (shooters view):
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/IMG_0086a.jpg?t=1202752089
Aimpoint 3x Magnifier move out of the way via the LaRue Pivot Mount (shooters view):
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/IMG_0085a.jpg?t=1202752104
(Disclaimer: The dot in the Aimpoint is 2 MOA, and the camera is set too far away from the 3x Magnifier for proper eye relief (thus the large black circle in the optic). The pictures were taken to show how the LaRue Pivot mount looked from the shooter's perspective.)
S/F,
Jeff
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/IMG_0089a.jpg?t=1202784793
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s206/molsen2295/USMC03/Colt%20with%20Aimpoint/IMG_0092a.jpg?t=1202784898
QuickStrike
02-16-08, 17:17
I'm waiting for the AIMPOINT M4 where the battery compartment is lower. Is this the "S" model?
usmcchet9296
04-21-08, 19:04
Wow first or 2nd post and Im gonna step in it real thick here
I was in the Marines for 4 years and that is about all the "tactical" background I have. I did shoot rifle expert for the 4 years I was in during rifle quals which is a pretty big deal in the Corps so I aint no slouch when it comes to shooting. If I were to suggest a optic for CQB/home defence I would suggest iron sights on a shotgun. Lets face it most of us aren't in the Military, para-military, or LE and when Mr. Badguy does showup the best gun to get him to change his mind is a shotgun............... and a pump at that. Just the sound should deter him and as for sights well its a shotgun just point it in the general direction and pull the trigger
usmcchet9296
04-21-08, 19:08
Oh another thing
all the fancy optics in the world will help you very little if you cannot shoot proficiently with iron sights. remember when all else fails they are what you will need to depend on.
Failure2Stop
04-21-08, 19:09
Lets face it most of us aren't in the Military, para-military, or LE and when Mr. Badguy does showup the best gun to get him to change his mind is a shotgun............... and a pump at that. Just the sound should deter him and as for sights well its a shotgun just point it in the general direction and pull the trigger
ETA-
all the fancy optics in the world will help you very little if you cannot shoot proficiently with iron sights.
Are you serious?
If so, you may want to do some research.
Wow first or 2nd post and Im gonna step in it real thick here
<...snip...>
Lets face it most of us aren't in the Military, para-military, or LE and when Mr. Badguy does showup the best gun to get him to change his mind is a shotgun............... and a pump at that. Just the sound should deter him and as for sights well its a shotgun just point it in the general direction and pull the trigger
Well, I'll agree with the "wow" part.
A shotgun is certainly a perfectly suitable alternative for most people's personal & home defense needs. However, relying on the sound of a round being chambered, or worse assuming that one need only "point it in the general direction" to get a hit, are both dangerous misconceptions.
Just how big do you think a load of, say, 12g #00 is going to pattern at normal indoor room distances?
Jay Cunningham
04-21-08, 20:06
Wow first or 2nd post and Im gonna step in it real thick here
I was in the Marines for 4 years and that is about all the "tactical" background I have. I did shoot rifle expert for the 4 years I was in during rifle quals which is a pretty big deal in the Corps so I aint no slouch when it comes to shooting. If I were to suggest a optic for CQB/home defence I would suggest iron sights on a shotgun. Lets face it most of us aren't in the Military, para-military, or LE and when Mr. Badguy does showup the best gun to get him to change his mind is a shotgun............... and a pump at that. Just the sound should deter him and as for sights well its a shotgun just point it in the general direction and pull the trigger
Welcome to M4C!
I will have to assume that you qualified expert with the M16A4 on KD ranges. I would have to ask you how much CQB training you received in your 4 year timeframe, because there is obviously quite a bit of difference between employing a 20" from positions on a KD and what we are talking about.
I would also ask why you recommend a shotgun with iron sights - what specifically in your experience leads you to suggest this? I would also ask why you would recommend a condition 3 long gun for HD instead of condition 1, especially in the case of a pump shotgun where the leading cause of malfs is a short stroke?
Jay Cunningham
04-21-08, 20:08
Oh another thing
all the fancy optics in the world will help you very little if you cannot shoot proficiently with iron sights. remember when all else fails they are what you will need to depend on.
A red dot optic is easier to hit your target with than properly aligning iron sights - this really cannot be disputed.
I think Chet is trying to say you should learn your irons while saving for a very expensive and very nice electronic optic. That way if the optic ever goes down, you aren't left holding your dick.
But yes, it's not entirely true what he said. I could remove my BUIS and do perfectly fine with my Aimpoint. I don't need training with irons to use an Aimpoint.
Wow first or 2nd post and Im gonna step in it real thick here
I was in the Marines for 4 years and that is about all the "tactical" background I have. I did shoot rifle expert for the 4 years I was in during rifle quals which is a pretty big deal in the Corps so I aint no slouch when it comes to shooting. If I were to suggest a optic for CQB/home defence I would suggest iron sights on a shotgun. Lets face it most of us aren't in the Military, para-military, or LE and when Mr. Badguy does showup the best gun to get him to change his mind is a shotgun............... and a pump at that. Just the sound should deter him and as for sights well its a shotgun just point it in the general direction and pull the trigger
When I first got on the SWAT team almost a decade ago, being the new guy I showed up to a few SWAT calls with an M4 and was quickly told that the M4 carbine was a no-go for doing entry work.
In the late 90's, shotguns, MP5's, and pistols were used for entry work (CQB) and rifles and carbines were used for perimeter and precision work.
We used the M16 platform in the Security Forces Bn for CQB missions and I prefer the M4 carbine over the shotgun for several reasons.
So until I could gather the proper data and present it to the "powers that be", I had to use a shotgun for entry work.
I used a Benelli Super 90 M1 (18" barrel and fixed stock). I found the shotgun to be long and cumbersome. I might as well had been carrying a musket or a M1 Garand.
Within the year I got the M4 carbine platform approved for entry work. Now just about everyone on the team uses an M4 carbine for entry work (to include those guys who had used Benelli's and 870's for years). We still have a few guys that are more comfortable / proficient with the shotgun, but a majority prefer the M4 carbine.
Because the 18" barreled Benelli was so long and cumbersome, I did the BATFE paperwork that allowed me to put a 14" barrel on my personally owned Benelli. The new shorter 14" Benelli made a huge difference. But consider that my M4 carbine (non-NFA) is still shorter than the 14" Benelli.
In my opinion the M4 carbine has so much more going for it over the shotgun. The M4 carbine is more compact, has less recoil, easier to load, more ammo on tap, quicker follow up shots, more modular, lends it's self better to mounting optics / lights / etc, takes less training time to become proficient, more manuiverable in a CQB enviornment, doesn't require as much dexterity to load and operate, etc, etc.
The shotgun is a tool in the tool box. But for most people working in a CQB enviornment (no matter if it's a home owner protecting his castle, a SWAT Officer serving a high risk warrant, or a member of the Military doing a CQB mission abroad), my experiences have shown me that given the option between a shotgun and a carbine, a majority of shooters who use both will select the carbine for reasons mentioned above.
Take care and stay safe,
Semper Fi,
Jeff
usmcchet9296
04-21-08, 21:20
I think Chet is trying to say you should learn your irons while saving for a very expensive and very nice electronic optic. That way if the optic ever goes down, you aren't left holding your dick.
But yes, it's not entirely true what he said. I could remove my BUIS and do perfectly fine with my Aimpoint. I don't need training with irons to use an Aimpoint.
Exactly
granted optics are better than they were in the time I was in the corps but batteries still fail and in combat optics can break
What I was tring to say is a shotgun is a easy weapon to use as compared to a AR/M16 for a novice
you only need basic alignment in a CQB/close in situation to put the shot on target
I do have come CQB training but basic compared to some here
I was MEUSOC trained so MOUNT/CQB was something we learned
usmcchet9296
04-21-08, 21:23
A red dot optic is easier to hit your target with than properly aligning iron sights - this really cannot be disputed.
Tis true
I have a Reflex sight on my AR and its point and click but buds I still talk to in the Corps have told me of times there optics went down and they had to switch back to there basic marksmanship ie: iron sights
Personally, I think the second scenario is just a recipe for disaster, but if you're going to squeeze off a round or two while semi-conscious and scared sh*tless, the optic of choice would have to be an Aimpoint. I suppose you could leave an Eotech on all the time if you were diligent about replacing the batteries every couple of weeks or so, but that would require planning...;)
I keep an AR with Eotech 552 next to my bed many nights. I turn the Eotech on before I go to bed and it shuts itself down by morning. The AA bateries last a very long time, In fact I usually just change them out after several months to make myself feel better. I think the eotech and a good tac light mounted is probably one of the best solutions for home defense. I cant imagine trying to find the irons while half asleep in the dark in a life or death situation- most people in that situation for the first time will not focus on the irons anyway they will focus on the threat. The good thing about the eotech or aimpoint is that you can focus on the threat and still aim your weopon properly.
Another thing at close range you can still shoot accurate shots even with your eotech or aimpoint shut off. Just fill the bad guys chest into the optics glass and pull the trigger. Use the front sights in the window also to help you align onto your target. You should be able to hit quite easily with very little practice.
The good thing about the eotech or aimpoint is that you can focus on the threat and still aim your weopon properly.
You can do this with irons also. Forget the rear app at contact distance. Just put the front sight post center mass, and you can get fast hits. You have to light the threat up anyway, so you'll be able to make out your front sight.
GREAT POST 03!! About the EOTECH...Is that Rev F is the latest model? My optic experience is limited to the M68 CCO(Aimpoint)that was issued with my
M4. It was a nice piece of kit. The EOTECH,I guess because of the "TV"shape to the screen LOOKS like it would work better. But this is all guesswork on my part. Pat Rogers, in an e-mail to me, said the same thing about the EOTECHs going down in the courses he runs. I'm ordering an LWRC M6 in the next few days. I intend to get some "iron sight" time(plus teach my 16 yr old the "ways of the AR")in first then buy an optic. I guess I'll be leaning toward the Aimpoint,although the BUY AMERICAN voice says EOTECH!! THANKS for the real world info:)
I own (9) Aimpoints and (0) EO Tech's. In some circles, this is what they refer to as "A clue" ;)
S/F,
Jeff
Have you used the Aimpoint M4?
I have been running both the M4 and M4S, as well as the T1 Micro:
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk99/USMC03_photos/Pat%20Rogers%20May%202008/IMG_0581.jpg?t=1213320761
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk99/USMC03_photos/Noveske%20N4/IMG_0634.jpg
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk99/USMC03_photos/LMT%20SBR/IMG_0659.jpg?t=1211943460
S/F,
Jeff
This is a very helpful POV write up that I've absorbed in one sitting, and I'm still yearning to learn. Great pictures to boot by the way!
Enjoy!
Now that I am using an Aimpoint T-1 I have come to the conclusion that all other red dot sights are obsolete.
[QUOTE=USMC03;41591]
If as an armed civilian you are unlucky enough to be the intended victim of a violent crime, you are most likely going to be involved in a defensive or reactive fight, not an offensive fight. The criminal, much like an animal of prey will pick the intended victim, the date, the time, and the place for the attack.
If a criminal kicks in your front door to committ a home invasion robbery, he isn't going to sit in the front living room like a prom date and wait for you (the victim) to turn on your optic, put on your multi-cam plate carrier, and get ready for the fight. He is there it dominate you and to control you and to get what he wants (steal something of monitary value, take a human life, exact revenge, etc) In most cases you are barely going to have enough time to roll out of bed and grab your gun (much less turn on an optic, mess with a sling, insert a mag and chamber a round, etc) before the bad guy is in the same room as you. Crimes like this happen VERY quickly.
/QUOTE]
Excellent post. I've given this alot of thought over the years. Here's my take. In a home invasion scenario, you are at a disadvantage, even if you have a theoretical firepower advantage. In the above mentioned scenario, with the criminal kicking in the door. Although a common home invader likely doesn't speak in these terms, but he basically he wants speed, surprise, and in a sense violence of action. Make entry catching the homeowner off guard, locating the homeowner rapidly, and then overwelm them physically.
Another possible scenario is a criminal who makes entry undetected and is first discovered with you lieing on your back in bed. Thats why I prefer a pistol within arms reach, to a carbine. What is statiscally more likely to happen ? I have no idea. Something to consider anyways. You have to bring your weapon to bear fast, that much I do know. Obviously a carbine is a better weapon than a pistol. I figure if I have time to retrieve a rifle, I would given the choice.
As far as the choice of weapons of home defense, I fully agree with USMC03. Irons with a tritium post and white light is the way to go for a primary HD carbine with optics secondary. The carbine I would use for HD, is a LMT 14.5 w/ aimpoint, Larue A1 rear sight and Surefire. Clearly you want some sort of illuminated sight and white light, at the minimum.
Jay Cunningham
06-26-08, 22:43
If your optic is an Aimpoint (which it should be) why would you ever turn it off? Why wouldn't your carbine be in Condition 1?
What was quote above was my response to a discussion from early 2005. The poster above only quoted part of what I wrote.
I was not advocating that a homeowner's pistol / long gun should not be in condition 1. The point I was trying to get across was that in a home invasion there will be no time to -load your firearm -turn on your optic -mess with a sling -etc. These comments were in reply to other people who posted in the origional discuss.
For most of us, our guns, equipment, and tactics are constantly evolving.
In 2005 I was still turing off my Aimpoint ML2's every time I used them. And it wasn't uncommon to find shooters who were still using Aimpoint Comp M and Comp XD, and at the time EO Tech's seemed to be more popular than Aimpoints (even though I was getting in constand arguments with people about how many times I had seen EO Tech's go down during SWAT missions, during training classes, etc).
At the time, I didn't feel comfortalbe advising to keep your electronic red dot sight on 24 / 7 (especially EO Techs). Thus I recommended a white light and iron sights for a home defense / bed side gun.
As times goes on, we progress. For approxiamtely the last year I leave all of my Aimpoints on 24 / 7.
Consider that the origional post is over 3 years old, and it just kept getting added onto as I tried different optics. My origional comments about the CQ/T date back to Feb / March of 2002.
That being said, much of the information contained in the origional post is still useful and relevant.
S/F,
Jeff
Battl3fr0nt
07-28-08, 23:06
do they sell a Polarizing filter for the EoTech or AimPoint, I think it would help alot in long range type shooting.. I know when weaing my Polarized/UV RX sunglasses when shooting my ACOG it helps alot in bring out the target in daylight/bright light
Perhaps not such a great idea if you're wearing polarized sunglasses too. ;)
Battl3fr0nt
07-28-08, 23:29
Too bad theres a very vocal group on the internet with ZERO real world experience or training for that matter that will doggedly argue your well thought out logic.
Good post bro.
thats to true... just alot of people want to say they have the best optic when there is no best optic.. it is what works best for you.. But for HD I would say irons with a good light would prolly be the best option and even a green laser as you do alot of point shooting in CQB as it is.. that is also a good thing to learn, being able to hit within a open hand in a small area like a room without even using your sights/optic.. I find you need to know that if you have a ACOG. you can get fast with the ACOG but nothing like a red dot in CQB.. I am thinking of getting the 1.5x compact ACOG I would think it would be almost as fast as a aimpoint yet give you a tiny bit of power for longer range stuff.. I have only used the TA11,TA33 and a few of the different TA31's after checking them out I went with the TA31F but I dont have my AR set up for HD but I could flip off the ACOG and flip up the BUIS and it would be in 2 secs.. I am thinking about getting a Aimpoint or the 1.5x ACOG compact for my next LMT build, prolly going to go with the ACOG 1.5x I dont have very good eyes and it would be for within 300m.. I will have to check one out befor buying..
anyone own a ACOG compact 1.5x, how do you like it?
I'm a LEO and I just attended a 2 day carbine course. I used iron sights only the first day and added an eotech 552 the second day. At close quarters distances, without optics, I was able to get (somewhere in the body cavity) hits fast by keeping a solid cheek weld and picking up only the front sight. However, I was able to make batter hits slightly faster with the eotech. I see some people claim that only the aimpoints are reliable. FWIW one of the instructors and two of the students in my class had eotechs. Every rifle except mine malfuntioned at some point during the course. None of the optics had any issues.
That said, I do not trust any electronics with my life. I will be using a fixed BUIS so that all I have to do is squint my left eye and focus on my iron sights if the red dot ever disappears.
ChoppinFatTony
09-14-08, 14:27
Durning my time with my unit(5+ years, 2 1/2 deployments to the sandbox, where i am currently at now again), i have used M68's, ACOG's(4x) and 552 EO Tech. I have used all of them on flat ranges(5-50m) shoot houses(day and nite) and actual combat(yes where the enemy is throwing everything at you to kill you).
My favorite optic hands down is the 552, even so much to have gotten my own. I feel that I had better situal awerness and a easier reticule to see than just a dot.
However, like it has been previously stated, there is no one optic for everyone in this world and it just comes down to operator preference.
Leupold has several models of the 1.5-5x20 VX-III 30mm with Illuminated German #4 dot and an Illuminated circle dot. Would the German dot show up better during bright sun light over the circle dot? Would either of these scopes be good choice for home defense?
http://www.swfa.com/c-307-leupold-vx-iii-riflescopes.aspx
I love the Leupold 1.5 - 5x for competition, but it's not something I would use at work.
The illuminated reticle washes out when used with white light and you are left with a black reticle. A black reticle is very hard to see on dark blue, brown, black, or other dark colored clothing.
For home defense I would choose an electronic red dot like an Aimpoint any day of the week over a variable powered scope like a Leupold or Schmidt and Bender.
S/F,
Jeff
I love the Leupold 1.5 - 5x for competition, but it's not something I would use at work.
The illuminated reticle washes out when used with white light and you are left with a black reticle. A black reticle is very hard to see on dark blue, brown, black, or other dark colored clothing.
For home defense I would choose an electronic red dot like an Aimpoint any day of the week over a variable powered scope like a Leupold or Schmidt and Bender.
S/F,
Jeff
Thanks, I will look at the Aimpoint.
The Meprolite reflex sight works on fiber optic light collection during the day and is tritium-illuminated at night - it's "always-on" and requires no batteries, and I think is a good choice for HD.
There's also the ITL MARS site, which does run on a AA battery, but is a reflex sight with variable yellow-dot size and, important for night and close-range - has a built in laser. (visible and IR)
Ok, so it's now November 1st. Is there any more feedback from anyone regarding the Leupold Prismatic? They seem to out and available so what's the low down.
theblackknight
11-18-08, 23:17
I might as well had been carrying a musket or a M1 Garand.
Jeff
The mental picture I got from this caused stomach pains from laughing soo much.
"tactical musket"
Alaskapopo
11-20-08, 17:01
If your optic is an Aimpoint (which it should be) why would you ever turn it off? Why wouldn't your carbine be in Condition 1?
Long guns per department policy are left chamber empty until they are deployed. Long guns should not be stored with the chamber loaded. I don't know of a single department that authorizes that.
Pat
Who gives a damn what your agency thinks? I'm not constrained to their policies, which are stupid anyway. Condition 1 IS a better way to store a defensive firearm.
Alaskapopo
11-21-08, 12:01
Who gives a damn what your agency thinks? I'm not constrained to their policies, which are stupid anyway. Condition 1 IS a better way to store a defensive firearm.
It is not just my agency its pretty much all lEO agencies and the military as well. Storing a rifle or shotgun with a loaded chamber is not a good idea. Now as soon as you put your hands on the weapon it should be loaded at that time. But its stupid to have the weapon with a loaded chamber in the rack or in any other location where you are not in actual control of that long gun. Long guns are not designed with the drop safeties that handguns are. For example if you were to get into an accient with your cruiser your long gun could fire. Most handguns are designed to be carried fully loaded and are drop safe. Most long guns are not designed this way.
Do you understand what the various conditions are. Condition 1 is loaded chamber and loaded magazine safety on. Condition 3 or what is called cruiser carry in Law Enforcement Circles is loaded magazine and empty chamber. That is the proper way to store a long gun when not in use. I realize you are still just a student. But you should make sure you word your post where it is not flame bait and you should make sure you read the posters post fully before replying. I did not state my agency does not allow condition one. I said my agency and most all leo agencys do not allow condtion one storage of long guns. A little respect goes a long way. Also long guns are generally considered offensive firearms while pistols are considered defensive in nature. We break out the long guns when we know there is going to be a fight. We carry handguns when we don't expect a fight but they are there just in case. Obviously a home defense situation is different but its still not a good idea to store your long guns with a loaded chamber in the home. I feel storing a long gun with the chamber loaded is stupid.
Pat
Jack_Stroker
11-24-08, 15:24
Who gives a damn what your agency thinks? I'm not constrained to their policies, which are stupid anyway. Condition 1 IS a better way to store a defensive firearm.
If we are talking about keeping a carbine next to your bed at night for self-defense then I'd be inclined to agree. Short of that, no. There is a reason the Military and Law enforcement agencies generally do not store their weapons that way. It can create an unecessarily dangerous situation where one didn't need to exist.
My carbine is stored condition 3 w/ aimpoint on at night setting.
Who gives a damn what your agency thinks? I'm not constrained to their policies, which are stupid anyway. Condition 1 IS a better way to store a defensive firearm.
I don't follow on why Condition 1 would be a "better" way to store a weapon that is NOT drop safe. :confused:
If I need to deploy my bean, I can charge the weapon at that time.
Jack_Stroker
11-24-08, 20:12
My carbine is stored condition 3 w/ aimpoint on at night setting.
I store my Bushmaster empty. I store my Colt LE6920 with a full mag and the weapon unchambered. Safety is on and the bolt is in the forward position. I have an EOTech so no matter what my optic is off after sitting there for four hours.
On the subject of optics, I am now an Aimpoint convert. I'm not totally sold on Aimpoint as I have yet to use mine, but I've ordered one and the reason for that is complaints I've developed about the EOTech over time. The first of which is the battery saving feature where the optic turns off after 4 or 8 hours. I ran into that once on an extended shooting outage. I didn't care for that. I also can't stand how it doesn't save your brightness settings when you turn the optic on. You have to re-adjust the brightness each time. Also, even at full power it isn't the easiest thing to see in the daylight. Batteries must be replaced far too often for my tastes. I had to switch to irons at one point because the batteries died on me with little warning. It does blink the reticle and let you know the batteries are dying but once it starts doing this you have very little time left before the batteries die completely.
From what I've been reading switching to an Aimpoint will definitely address most if not all these issues. I've got an Aimpoint Comp M4S on order and can't wait until it arrives.
I have been running both the M4 and M4S, as well as the T1 Micro:
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk99/USMC03_photos/Pat%20Rogers%20May%202008/IMG_0581.jpg?t=1213320761
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk99/USMC03_photos/Noveske%20N4/IMG_0634.jpg
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk99/USMC03_photos/LMT%20SBR/IMG_0659.jpg?t=1211943460
S/F,
Jeff
Is there an advantage between the M4 and/or M4s? Which model do you prefer and why?
Also, thank you for sharing your knowledge and opinions. It's is very helpful for someone new to ARs.
Is there an advantage between the M4 and/or M4s? Which model do you prefer and why?
Also, thank you for sharing your knowledge and opinions. It's is very helpful for someone new to ARs.
The only difference between the M4 and M4S is the placement of the batter box. The M4 has the battery box at 1 o'clock. The M4S has the battery box at 5 o'clock.
*My* personal preference is for the M4S because it's lower profile and the battery box is down at 5 o'clock and out of the way. But I could put either on a gun and be happy with it.
When running an Aimpoint 3x magnifier, I actually prefer the M4 over the M4S, because you can get the 3x magnifier closer to the Aimpoint M4 when running the 3x magnifier in a LaRue pivot mount. The battery box on the M4S forces you to move the mount one position to the rear when using the 3x magnifier on the LaRue pivot mount.
Here is the M4 + 3x magnifier:
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk99/USMC03_photos/Noveske%20N4%20Recce%20Basic%20Black/IMG_0756.jpg
I don't have any pics of the M4S + 3x magnifier, but it's about the same distance as the T1 + 3x magnifier:
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk99/USMC03_photos/LMT%20with%20Short%20Dot/IMG_0384.jpg
S/F,
Jeff
When running an Aimpoint 3x magnifier, I actually prefer the M4 over the M4S, because you can get the 3x magnifier closer to the Aimpoint M4 when running the 3x magnifier in a LaRue pivot mount. The battery box on the M4S forces you to move the mount one position to the rear when using the 3x magnifier on the LaRue pivot mount.
I don't have any pics of the M4S + 3x magnifier, but it's about the same distance as the T1 + 3x magnifier:
Jeff,
Excellent work on this thread! Have you tried reversing the LaRue mounts on the M4S and T-1 (so that the lever is on the left side)? This should allow you to close the gap between the M4S/T-1 and the 3x magnifier.
St.Michael
12-29-08, 13:02
I know someone said something about their eyes being bad and I had a question that went along those lines. Does anyone have a slight astigmatism that has used the Aimpoint. I was wondering if that affects you at all or if anyone knows anything about that. Thanks for the great post. As a civie it's nice to learn this stuff from all angles and viewpoints of people who are LEO too.
WitchDoctor02
12-30-08, 23:30
I know someone said something about their eyes being bad and I had a question that went along those lines. Does anyone have a slight astigmatism that has used the Aimpoint. I was wondering if that affects you at all or if anyone knows anything about that. Thanks for the great post. As a civie it's nice to learn this stuff from all angles and viewpoints of people who are LEO too.
I wrote a longer response just before my magic box hiccuped, so if it posts twice, sorry. Regarding the astigmatism issue, there are number of threads on various forums where guys complain about the issue, and from a technical standpoint, this may be the case -- I'm sure someone more knowledgeable than me will chime in, so take my experience for whatever it's worth.
I've used Aimpoints on my issued M4s for several years, as well as an ACOG TA31RCO-M4 and EoTech 552s on personal weapons. I didn't know I had an astigmatism until 2005, despite having used reflex sights for years. ACOGs - no issue whatsoever. Aimpoints and EoTechs tend to be a bit blurry (like a slight smear rather than a crisp dot) if I focus on the dot itself, which, of course, I don't. When focusing on the target, which I do, the 'problem' goes away and I have never had any issue.
Personally, I've favored EoTechs since 2006, perhaps for the 1 MOA center dot and previous M68 battery issues in the sandbox; however, I'm now an Aimpoint revert, and switching to the T-1 without any problems at all (so far). So, while some guys say it's a deal breaker, in my experience it's no big deal. YMMV. Hope that helps.
Is the Elcan usable for compitition ?
I used both the older Elcan and have a small amount of trigger time on the newer Specter (or whatever it's called). Didn't care for either of them.
I've seen very few competitiors using the Elcan in matches over the years.
S/F,
Jeff
So which optic do you suggest for competition?, I am a newby in IPSC rifle, but I shot IPSC pistol for 10 years. I live in europe so not all the optics mentioned here are availible in my country. Greetings Arno
TA11 ACOG or Leupold MR/T 1.5-5x most of the time.
S/F,
Jeff
Alaskapopo
01-26-09, 14:03
So which optic do you suggest for competition?, I am a newby in IPSC rifle, but I shot IPSC pistol for 10 years. I live in europe so not all the optics mentioned here are availible in my country. Greetings Arno
Trijicon Accupoint 1.25-4 power or the improved version that is a true 1 to 4 power.
The Meopta is very popular and is nice glass.
I like the Swarovski 1-6. It did very well for me in a few three gun matches last summer.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Semi%20auto%20rifles/IM001083.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Semi%20auto%20rifles/IM001084.jpg
Okee, so the new trijicon TR-24 ( 1 -4x) would be an option, but what kind of reticle would be your choice?
I'mGatMan!
02-06-09, 10:15
What was quote above was my response to a discussion from early 2005. The poster above only quoted part of what I wrote.
I was not advocating that a homeowner's pistol / long gun should not be in condition 1. The point I was trying to get across was that in a home invasion there will be no time to -load your firearm -turn on your optic -mess with a sling -etc. These comments were in reply to other people who posted in the origional discuss.
For most of us, our guns, equipment, and tactics are constantly evolving.
In 2005 I was still turing off my Aimpoint ML2's every time I used them. And it wasn't uncommon to find shooters who were still using Aimpoint Comp M and Comp XD, and at the time EO Tech's seemed to be more popular than Aimpoints (even though I was getting in constand arguments with people about how many times I had seen EO Tech's go down during SWAT missions, during training classes, etc).
At the time, I didn't feel comfortalbe advising to keep your electronic red dot sight on 24 / 7 (especially EO Techs). Thus I recommended a white light and iron sights for a home defense / bed side gun.
As times goes on, we progress. For approxiamtely the last year I leave all of my Aimpoints on 24 / 7.
Consider that the origional post is over 3 years old, and it just kept getting added onto as I tried different optics. My origional comments about the CQ/T date back to Feb / March of 2002.
That being said, much of the information contained in the origional post is still useful and relevant.
S/F,
Jeff
So it is now 2/09, and I'd like to know what you perceive to be your optimal HD/CQB kit now. I'm very interested in the Aimpoint M4s, based on my research here and around the web, but I saw in one of your original posts here that you prefer something with an MOA of 4. Has that changed since you originally posted? What do you now think, besides the iron sights/white light option, is the most effective setup?
Thanks, Jeff. I'm finding your posts here invaluable.
Aimpoint M2 / ML2 / M3 / ML3 / Comp M4 / M4S Micro T1......just leave it on and change the batteries on a regular basis.
For CQB work I still prefer a 4 MOA dot, but have been used 2 MOA Aimpoint ML3's / M4's for the last few years. Not a huge issue, just something that I have noticed that I prefer based on my first hand experiences.
S/F,
Jeff
Just saw your post. First I was cranky and I took your post to reason that because it was policy, it was a valid idea.
Do you understand what the various conditions are. Condition 1 is loaded chamber and loaded magazine safety on. Condition 3 or what is called cruiser carry in Law Enforcement Circles is loaded magazine and empty chamber. That is the proper way to store a long gun when not in use.
When I store a weapon in a safe or in another way that it is not readily available I unload it. The AR15 has a floating firing pin and theoretically could fire if the weapon was accelerated to sufficient velocity and suddenly decelerated. The same is true of my 1911 and I don't think it's likely to occur. Furthermore as a three time Gunsite graduate I am well aware of the different conditions one can carry and store weapons in.
I realize you are still just a student. But you should make sure you word your post where it is not flame bait and you should make sure you read the posters post fully before replying. I did not state my agency does not allow condition one. I said my agency and most all leo agencys do not allow condtion one storage of long guns. A little respect goes a long way.
I apologize if I disrespected you, but your tone is disrespectful of me as well. Yes I am a college student. I spent some time in the real world, went back to school and am now four required classes from a degree. I also have several hundred hours of professional shooting instruction and years of experience carrying and using firearms.
Also long guns are generally considered offensive firearms while pistols are considered defensive in nature. We break out the long guns when we know there is going to be a fight. We carry handguns when we don't expect a fight but they are there just in case. Obviously a home defense situation is different but its still not a good idea to store your long guns with a loaded chamber in the home. I feel storing a long gun with the chamber loaded is stupid.
Pat
Storing a weapon locked upright in a cruiser loaded would be foolish, I agree. There is no point when you have to manipulate the weapon anyway to unlock it, yet the weapon is not well secured in the cruiser when it is left alone. What bothers me is that many agencies require the weapon to always be unloaded in vehicles regardless of how it is carried. I'm not bothered rolling down the highway with a loaded rifle jammed between the seats. I also cover it so it can't be seen and I don't leave it unattended so it can't be stolen.
I'mGatMan!
02-06-09, 18:29
Aimpoint M2 / ML2 / M3 / ML3 / Comp M4 / M4S Micro T1......just leave it on and change the batteries on a regular basis.
For CQB work I still prefer a 4 MOA dot, but have been used 2 MOA Aimpoint ML3's / M4's for the last few years. Not a huge issue, just something that I have noticed that I prefer based on my first hand experiences.
S/F,
Jeff
Thanks for that. It reinforces to me that I am on the right track for my first optic.
Alaskapopo
02-07-09, 00:11
Just saw your post. First I was cranky and I took your post to reason that because it was policy, it was a valid idea.
When I store a weapon in a safe or in another way that it is not readily available I unload it. The AR15 has a floating firing pin and theoretically could fire if the weapon was accelerated to sufficient velocity and suddenly decelerated. The same is true of my 1911 and I don't think it's likely to occur. Furthermore as a three time Gunsite graduate I am well aware of the different conditions one can carry and store weapons in.
I apologize if I disrespected you, but your tone is disrespectful of me as well. Yes I am a college student. I spent some time in the real world, went back to school and am now four required classes from a degree. I also have several hundred hours of professional shooting instruction and years of experience carrying and using firearms.
Storing a weapon locked upright in a cruiser loaded would be foolish, I agree. There is no point when you have to manipulate the weapon anyway to unlock it, yet the weapon is not well secured in the cruiser when it is left alone. What bothers me is that many agencies require the weapon to always be unloaded in vehicles regardless of how it is carried. I'm not bothered rolling down the highway with a loaded rifle jammed between the seats. I also cover it so it can't be seen and I don't leave it unattended so it can't be stolen.
We are going to have to agree to disagree.
Pat
Hayseed_40
02-19-09, 07:24
It is not just my agency its pretty much all lEO agencies and the military as well. Storing a rifle or shotgun with a loaded chamber is not a good idea. Now as soon as you put your hands on the weapon it should be loaded at that time. But its stupid to have the weapon with a loaded chamber in the rack or in any other location where you are not in actual control of that long gun. Long guns are not designed with the drop safeties that handguns are. For example if you were to get into an accient with your cruiser your long gun could fire. Most handguns are designed to be carried fully loaded and are drop safe. Most long guns are not designed this way.
Do you understand what the various conditions are. Condition 1 is loaded chamber and loaded magazine safety on. Condition 3 or what is called cruiser carry in Law Enforcement Circles is loaded magazine and empty chamber. That is the proper way to store a long gun when not in use. I realize you are still just a student. But you should make sure you word your post where it is not flame bait and you should make sure you read the posters post fully before replying. I did not state my agency does not allow condition one. I said my agency and most all leo agencys do not allow condtion one storage of long guns. A little respect goes a long way. Also long guns are generally considered offensive firearms while pistols are considered defensive in nature. We break out the long guns when we know there is going to be a fight. We carry handguns when we don't expect a fight but they are there just in case. Obviously a home defense situation is different but its still not a good idea to store your long guns with a loaded chamber in the home. I feel storing a long gun with the chamber loaded is stupid.
Pat
Good response - our dept is same. We also require a chamber flag be put in (the stick kind with a big loop). If positioned just right, you can pull it out so that it catches the bolt sufficiently to charge a round.
Jay Cunningham
03-10-09, 10:51
I just deleted over twenty extraneous posts.
If this thread doesn't get back in line people are going to start getting hammered.
EzGoingKev
03-11-09, 00:08
I used both the older Elcan and have a small amount of trigger time on the newer Specter (or whatever it's called). Didn't care for either of them.
S/F,
Jeff
Would you please expand upon what you did not like about the Elcan?
On paper it would seem like it is an Aimpoint & and an ACOG in one package.
Rumor Mill Filter On:
One problem with Ellcan's that I have heard of (but can not swear to) is that they are listed as a non-exportable item. One poster on (another board?) bewailed the problems with trying to get the tritium component renewed in Canada.
I remember reading about this a year or so ago, but have not investigated further.
EzGoingKev
03-13-09, 15:32
One poster on (another board?) bewailed the problems with trying to get the tritium component renewed in Canada.
The irony being that the CAN in Elcan stands for Canada.
I saw your screen name over in NE Shooters. What part of MA do you live in?
The_War_Wagon
04-11-09, 09:00
I've often looked at the Leupold CQ/T as glass better suited to a different rifle than the AR (even a 20" bbl'd rifle). It seems too ungainly on that platform, and given that part of the advantage of a carbine-length weapon is it's size and light weight, the glass shouldn't be slowing it down, from being RAPIDLY deployed.
That said, I still like the CQ/T... astride my PTR91 though. Having had Williams Trigger Specialties tune it up for me, I like the CQ/T / .308 combo, for LONGER range work. Seems it would be well-suited to the FAL & M1A too, if you own such a rifle.
$.02 from a satisfied CQ/T owner.
The irony being that the CAN in Elcan stands for Canada.
I saw your screen name over in NE Shooters. What part of MA do you live in?
North of Boston; Watertown/Cambridge/Waltham area.
What are the sights being used by the Army boys and USMC for the TYPICAL (if there is such a thing) walking patrols in the desert citys? Is it TA01NSN?, Aimpoints, Eo techs?
Thanks
Alaskapopo
04-12-09, 15:35
What are the sights being used by the Army boys and USMC for the TYPICAL (if there is such a thing) walking patrols in the desert citys? Is it TA01NSN?, Aimpoints, Eo techs?
Thanks
I am not in the military but from what I have read the Army issues Aimpoint M68. The Marines have started to Issue the TA31F Acog. It seems many units allow their soliders to use personally owned optics of all kinds like Eotechs, S&B short does you name it.
Pat
Failure2Stop
05-14-09, 01:16
What are the sights being used by the Army boys and USMC for the TYPICAL (if there is such a thing) walking patrols in the desert citys? Is it TA01NSN?, Aimpoints, Eo techs?
Thanks
What we want, what we need, and what we get can be 3 entirely seperate concepts.
The most commonly issued optics are the M68 (Aimpoint M2/M4), SU-231 (EoTech 553), TA-01 NSN ACOG, TA31 RCO-A4/M4, and TA31ECOS.
snakedocter
05-16-09, 05:07
Everything is give and take. You have to give up one thing to gain another. I am NOT as fast with the Short Dot as I am with the Aimpoint. BUT....I am giving up a little speed on the low end so I can have the magnificiation.
If I wasn't kicking doors, I most likely have not purchased the Short Dot.
In my line of work 75% of the missions are CQB and the other 25% can range from permiter work, to overwatch on a VIP detail, to searching large warehouses or schools, etc.
SWAT missions can often be dynamic in nature. One minute you can find yourself on a permiter trying to see if the barricaded gunman standing in the window has a gun or a cell phone in his hand, and the next minute you're being picked up as part of the entry team. On other missions you may find yourself sitting across a large parking lot covering a buy / bust operation, the bad guy goes mobile and now your part of a vehicle take down.
100 hours is not all that great, BUT.....it's about give and take. I'll put up with the short but acceptable battery life in order to see the electronic red dot in all lighting conditions (bright sun light, white light, etc).
It all comes down to *your needs*. Target / threat identification is very important in my line of work. A guy who uses his rifle for self defense may not have the same as a Law Enforcement Officer / Military.
Semper Fi,
Jeff
I have sale my short dot gen. I ,because the blue color on the view was realy bad,this happen is result of the use with NVD,I have heard the gen. II is better but
I will switch to the NF NXS 1-4x with cristal clear view
the only easy day was yesterday
In short for a civilian using the AR15 as a home defense gun, I would highly suggest iron sights with a large rear ghost ring style sight like the Same Plane Rear Appeture made by XS Sights and a large tritium front sight post like the Big Dot or simular front sight post also made by XS Sights and a quality white like.
The light should be ergonomically placed on the carbine where it is easy to access with the support hand on the handguards.
If an optic is desired I would go with a non-magnified electronic red dot like the Aimpoint or the EO Tech. My presonal preference is with the Aimpoint and it's what I've used on duty for the last 7 - 8 years.
Jeff, thanks for this great, common-sense post. I've read this whole thread through, and it really helped fill in some gaps, and helped avoid some costly "rabbit trails" in trying to purchase a good optic.
For someone who doesn't kick in doors professionally, but keeps a carbine set up for home defense, would I be a lot better off tactically if I upgraded to something like an Aimpoint M4 or T1? For several years time I've been using the original setup recommended in this thread, with tritium front/aperture rear irons, and a Surefire light.
But I do hear what some are saying, that with a red dot, you can be faster to acquire your target because you don't have to line up the front sight with the rear, they don't have to be in the same plane (so you can shoot quickly from less-than-perfect angles), etc. Do you think for an average HD user, that the addition of a red dot is going to make a significant difference in your effectiveness?
I have no problem getting something like an Aimpoint T1 if it'll have an impact, but if the difference it makes is likely to be only modest or marginal, I probably would just as soon keep my setup as it is with iron sights, saving the cost and keeping it simple.
Thanks again for the posts!
Hits on target will always be faster and easier to acquire with a red dot sight (such as an Aimpoint) than with iron sights.
S/F,
Jeff
Hits on target will always be faster and easier to acquire with a red dot sight (such as an Aimpoint) than with iron sights.
You also mentioned earlier that you liked the Aimpoint 3x magnifier. If I go ahead and run the T1 as my red dot, is the 3x + T1 be the best way to extend my range a bit? Or would I likely do better with say an ACOG + T1 in an offset mount?
Aimpoint 3x magnifier is the way to go.
I can't even beging to wrap my head around why someone would want an ACOG on a home defense gun as a primary optic.
S/F,
Jeff
Aimpoint 3x magnifier is the way to go.
I can't even beging to wrap my head around why someone would want an ACOG on a home defense gun as a primary optic.
S/F,
Jeff
The rifle gets used for more than HD.
USMC03:
First off, thank you very much for taking the time to put your gatherings and knowledge into this thread. And thanks for putting your life on the line as many others also do that belong to this forum.
I am a first time M4 owner as of this this past weekend :D. I plan on shooting a good bit of rounds via my irons before I go to an Optic. From what I have read on this thread and gathered from folks on this site...I will def. be choosing an Aimpoint, and more than likely adding the 3x Magnifier, as funds permit.
I am stumped as to which Aimpoint to buy and why (T-1/M3L/M4S etc). What are your opinions on the pros and cons for each one? Also, is there any reliability/durability/ruggedness differences between any Aimpoint models? And I'm clueless as to where to start when it comes to choosing a tried and true, proper mount. Is a mount one of those things where I need to buy one and learn it, and maybe find out I don't like it or what? Do you place it more aft than fore?
I really don't know jack squat compared to the professionals and experts on here, so your help would be very much appreciated.
I bought the COMP C3 and is a great choice just the same as the rest but dont go as deep in water.
HD1911,
The Comp M4 (and M4S) and the Micro T1 are the newest generation. The M2, ML2, M3, and ML3 are older generation Aimpoints.
Nothing wrong with any of them, and all are extremely durable.
My preference is for the T1 due to size and weight. The T1 in a Larue mount is 6.2oz. A M4S in LaRue mount is 12.8oz. The T1 is less than half the weight of the M4S.
I have been using LaRue mounts since early 2004 for all my optics (Leupolds, ACOGs, Aimopints, etc) and have found no reason to switch to another mount.
Currently I have 18 optics for my AR's (Aimpoints, ACOGs, and a Leupold), all of then are on LaRue mounts, and 13 of those are T1's.
Use what works best for you.
HD1911,
The Comp M4 (and M4S) and the Micro T1 are the newest generation. The M2, ML2, M3, and ML3 are older generation Aimpoints.
Nothing wrong with any of them, and all are extremely durable.
My preference is for the T1 due to size and weight. The T1 in a Larue mount is 6.2oz. A M4S in LaRue mount is 12.8oz. The T1 is less than half the weight of the M4S.
I have been using LaRue mounts since early 2004 for all my optics (Leupolds, ACOGs, Aimopints, etc) and have found no reason to switch to another mount.
Currently I have 18 optics for my AR's (Aimpoints, ACOGs, and a Leupold), all of then are on LaRue mounts, and 13 of those are T1's.
Use what works best for you.
Hey thanks very much. Another question, if i might...between an ML3/M4/T1...which would you say works the best with the 3x Magnifier?
Littlebear
09-23-09, 21:02
A little different approach here: I lost sight in my left eye years ago; this has not slowed me down a bit, but I am about to select an optical sight to go atop a flatop 16" carbine. Expected range of shots ranges from CQB to 200 meters, day or night (closer range).
I have used an Aimpoint M4 before (loved the clarity, disliked the way it restricted my view of the target). I am leaning towards the 1x4 NF or one of the newer Accupoints. Any input would be appreciated.
Singlestack Wonder
11-05-09, 19:06
A little different approach here: I lost sight in my left eye years ago; this has not slowed me down a bit, but I am about to select an optical sight to go atop a flatop 16" carbine. Expected range of shots ranges from CQB to 200 meters, day or night (closer range).
I have used an Aimpoint M4 before (loved the clarity, disliked the way it restricted my view of the target). I am leaning towards the 1x4 NF or one of the newer Accupoints. Any input would be appreciated.
In what way did it restrict the view of your target? The Trijicon TR24 is a good choice for CQB out to 200 meters. With the triangle reticle, it's like using a RDS at 1x.
Alaskapopo
11-05-09, 19:13
In what way did it restrict the view of your target? The Trijicon TR24 is a good choice for CQB out to 200 meters. With the triangle reticle, it's like using a RDS at 1x.
I would actually say 300.
Pat
UrbanRunner
11-16-09, 22:11
Jeff,
Excellent work on this thread! Have you tried reversing the LaRue mounts on the M4S and T-1 (so that the lever is on the left side)? This should allow you to close the gap between the M4S/T-1 and the 3x magnifier.
Agreed on the excellent work! Thanks USMC03.
As I have noted in a separate thread an M4s is an option that I am considering along with a 3x magnifier.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=41307
I never saw an answer: Does the reversing of the LaRue mount work to resolve the gap issue?
UPDATE:
After finding a good price on a M4s I have placed an order and should receive it soon. It will include standard base, spacer, Killflash, and lens caps. Eventually, I will likely add the 3x magnifier with LaRue QD pivot mount.
Agreed on the excellent work! Thanks USMC03.
As I have noted in a separate thread an M4s is an option that I am considering along with a 3x magnifier.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=41307
I never saw an answer: Does the reversing of the LaRue mount work to resolve the gap issue?
Also, considering that a 3x magnifier would eventually be added to the mix, is the M4 preferable over the M4s?
I'd prefer the M4s with its lower profile but if mounting and access to switch are going to be hindered I'm thinking that the straight M4 would be better.
Urban Runner,
In February of 2008 I wrote a review on the Aimpoint 3x Magnifier. As a result of that review some shooters reported having no issues with the magnifier, while others reported having issues with the magnifier causing dot distortion, and one or two shooters even reported seeing two separate dots that were touching and looked like a figure 8.
A couple months later I reported trying the Aimpoint 3x Magnifier with the ML2, ML3, Comp M4, M4S, and T1 Micro. Through trial and error I found that the closer you could get the 3x Magnifier to the Aimpoint the crisper the dot was, and the better the sight picture looked. I don’t know why the sight picture looked better, it’s something that I can’t articulate.
During this same time frame (April / May 2008) I had purchased several Aimpoint Micro T1 red dot sights and LaRue Tactical Aimpoint T1 mounts. With the LaRue Tactical Aimpoint T1 mount, the throw lever is on the same side of the upper receiver as the ejection port (right side of the receiver), with the throw lever pointing to the rear. From past experience I knew it was the throw lever on the Aimpoint T1 mount that was interfering with getting the LaRue 3x Magnifier mount one space closer on the upper receiver to the Aimpoint Micro T1.
While mounting a Aimpoint Micro T1 onto the LaRue Aimpoint T1 mount I decided to turn the LaRue Aimpoint T1 mount around 180 degrees so that the throw lever was on the left side of the upper receiver and pointing forward. After attaching the Aimpoint Micro T1 to the LaRue mount and mounting the Aimpoint Micro T1 on the upper, I was able to get the Aimpoint 3x Magnifier butted up against the T1. Thus making the dot crisper and providing a better sight picture.
I posted this info on the original review on another board over a year ago.
*
http://www.03designgroup.com/img/3xt1.jpg
03designgroup | Getting the 3x Magnifier closer to the Aimpoint Micro T1 http://demigodllc.com/icon/extwh3.png (http://www.03designgroup.com/technotes/aimpoint-3x-magnifier-with-t1-larue) <----- click the link for more info on getting the 3x Magnifier closer to the Micro T1
*
Found a reply here in Sept of 2008:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showpost.php?p=213338&postcount=29
********************************************************************************************************************************************
Aimpoint M4 = battery box at the 1 o'clock position
Aimpoint M4S = battery box at the 5 o'clock position
The Aimpoint 3x magnifier butts right up against the Aimpoint M4 because the M4 mount doesn't interfer with the 3x magnifier and the battery box on the Aimpoint M4 (located at 1 o'clock) doesn't interfer with the 3x magnifer mount:
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk99/USMC03_photos/Noveske%20N4/IMG_0266-1.jpg?t=1210641090
Often times on the internet things get regergitatied several times and guys don't understand the how's or why's behind things. I have seen several guys recommending turining the mount around on the M4S in order to get the 3x magnifier closer to the M4S.
The LaRue throw lever mount on the M4S has nothing to do with getting the magnifier as close as possible to the M4S. The problem with the M4S is the batter box is located at the 5 o'clock position, and the batter box is in the same position as the pivot point on the LaRue 3x Magnifier mount.
If you are a left handed shooter, this is a non issue, because you have the LaRue 3x magnifier mount turned around 180 degrees (throw lever for the magnifier mount will be on the ejection port side of the gun, and the pivot part of the mount is on the left side of the gun and won't interfer with the battery box of the M4S). If the 3x magnifier mount is set up for a left handed shooter, you can get the 3x magnifier as close to the M4S as the 3x magnifier and M4 pictured above.
Aimpoint 3x magnifier with Aimpoint M4S. Note how the pivot portion of the 3x magnifier mount is located in the the same area as the battery box on the M4S. The battery box / pivot location is the issue with this set up, not the mount on the M4S. Hopefully this pic will give you a better visual:
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk99/USMC03_photos/FDE%20LMT/DPP_0030.jpg
Hope this information helps
Take care and be safe
ColdDeadHands
01-07-10, 20:49
Is the Short Dot still your #1 choice in 1-4 Optics?
The Short Dot is the best of the breed. However, it's heavy and expensive.
I sold of both of my Short Dots. I run a variable power scope for competition from time to time and run a Aimpoint (add the magnifier when it's needed) at work.
I've been working on updating the info in my first post as it's 3 - 4 years old, I just had a lot of other projects that have been taking priority lately.
There is a tremendous amount of good information that you have provided here.
I do have one specific question that I've yet to find a true answer to.
Its obvious that a red-dot op for CQB is highly recommended. It allows for faster target acquisition and transitions.
But what I never hear about is the use of a red dot and how they hold up when firing from an un-orthodox position which eliminates potential use of the dot.
Now days most defensive/secondary pistols have a light and ct laser attached but no red dot. In comp community most pistols have a red-dot op instead of a laser.
My question is why the practicality of the rdo has outweighed the possibility of adding a simple laser on defensive carbines as a secondary aiming system but the laser has outweighed an rdo on a defensive pistol.
Sorry for the rant...
ColdDeadHands
01-19-10, 12:33
I was actually thinking about adding a laser to my LMT for close range (0 - 15 yards).
Failure2Stop
01-19-10, 14:10
I like and use lasers on my work gun. The Atipal has both vis and IR lasers. The problem with them is that you have to switch them to the appropriate setting or you will wind up with an IR laser when you need to see it with the naked eye. Not a big problem, but not really optimal.
I would stick a laser on my personal rifles, but I haven't seen any with a good mount and activation system that I consider to be viable yet.
ColdDeadHands
01-19-10, 17:15
this is the one I've been thinking about getting; http://lasermax.com/product.php?id=127
I like and use lasers on my work gun. The Atipal has both vis and IR lasers. The problem with them is that you have to switch them to the appropriate setting or you will wind up with an IR laser when you need to see it with the naked eye. Not a big problem, but not really optimal.
I would stick a laser on my personal rifles, but I haven't seen any with a good mount and activation system that I consider to be viable yet.
I gave it some thought about the activation system and I do see what your saying.
In a dynamic low light environment activation of your light without leaving fire control or compromising your support hand grip is key and the same would apply if you had a weapon mounted laser as well.
The only solution that I can think of would be to have a t-switch mounted at 12 for the light and another switch mounted at 6 for the laser.
It appears in all the photos that the 3X unit lines up perfectly centered with an M4 but less so with the T1. Is this noticable in any way to the naked eye? Is FOV or anything else diminished?
I thought it would compromise the image, but it doesn't. And it doesn't matter how far apart the 3x is from the T1 either - even though I drew it up and estimated the "benefit" in alignment by keeping them as far apart as possible.
Magic!
Would a compact ACOG be any good?
Would a compact ACOG be any good?
Sure, for the long shots, but there's nothing quite like being able to go from 3x to 1x by slapping the magnifier off to the side in a quarter second via the LaRue Pivot Mount.
Very good information in this thread and I am another active duty member and have been for 15 years with LE experience.
I can tell you with the experience I have had over the years an EOtech is hard to beat for the money. Aimpoint is right there with them. I pretty much started out with EOtechs and moved on to Aimpoints and then onto the Trijicon Tri-power and have pretty much stopped at the MARS Reflex with laser optics.
I have 3 5.56 rifles. 2 Colt LE Carbines and an FN S2000. For medium range I use my Colt LE 6940 with Trijicon Acog TA31A. For CQB I use the FN S2000 with MARS Reflex/Laser. My Colt 6920 I am running the Trijicon Tri-power for basically plinking.
I also have a KRISS Super V that I am running an EOTech XPS for CQB and plinking.
My point is not one is better than the other when it comes down to it. Some will swear by Aimpoint or some will swear by Eotech, remember guys its just an opinion and it doesnt always mean its correct or right for the next guy. Years of experience comes into play and situations.
I see a lot of experience on this thread and thats great.
I honestly would sample each of these at a range and/or at a jugemental live fire rifle course. See how you do with each. Get the feel for each and just dont put 30 rounds through them give them a couple hundred rounds and go with different size targets at all ranges.
Just my opinion.
vicious_cb
06-22-10, 22:45
Have you had time to review the TR24 yet?
It's on my to do list, just been too busy to get it finished. Hopefully I can get it done in the next couple months.
petergun870
07-01-10, 22:18
Eotech for personal defense the 65 moa circle get you focused on target way faster.
Alaskapopo
07-01-10, 23:40
Eotech for personal defense the 65 moa circle get you focused on target way faster.
I did not have the same experience. I found that the Aimpoint with its single red dot to be faster. Less clutter.
Pat
Eotech for personal defense the 65 moa circle get you focused on target way faster.
I agree.. This being said from my point of veiw as a operator that conducts warrant entries on a regular basis and distance the to the threat is approx. 50 ft. of less.
I was in an OIS and was able to score three hits on a moving target at approx. 20 Ft. way. First shot hit the bottom jaw exited the back of the neck, second shot struck the upper chest exited the left thigh and third shot made contact as the subject was falling entering the back and exited the back of the subjects leg.
decodeddiesel
07-30-10, 18:49
I did not have the same experience. I found that the Aimpoint with its single red dot to be faster. Less clutter.
Pat
Agreed.
A couple months later I reported trying the Aimpoint 3x Magnifier with the ML2, ML3, Comp M4, M4S, and T1 Micro. Through trial and error I found that the closer you could get the 3x Magnifier to the Aimpoint the crisper the dot was, and the better the sight picture looked. I don’t know why the sight picture looked better, it’s something that I can’t articulate.
Jeff,
I'm not completely sure if this explanation is going to be 100% correct, but I may be at least partly correct. As an eye care professional, I have a basic understanding of optics, but I don't have a detailed understanding of an Aimpoint's internal engineering.
As a previous owner of a EOTech 512, I was a little concerned by the "sight picture" when I got my Aimpoint H1. I called Aimpoint CS to ask why there was a little rectangular unit at 5:00 disturbing the perfect circular tube. The answer was that it was the dot emitter. It was also described that the rear glass of the optic was set at a precise tilt so that the dot could be seen as it reflected off the glass. So it stands to reason that there should be a slight "ghost" image projecting from 5:00-11:00 because the dot will have a back surface reflection and a front surface reflection off the rear glass. The H1's 4 MOA dot has never looked as distinct to me as the EOTech's reticle.
When I have a magnifier behind my Aimpoint, the "ghost" image is magnified. In my experience, the ghost image was far worse with a Mako 7x vs the 5x. Yes, they're crap magnifiers, but the general principle is the same. I observe a slight figure 8 stretching from 5-11 o'clock. Another wild card in all this would be each individual shooters' uncorrected astigmatism which can either further exacerbate this creating comet shapes or other distortions. It is even possible that a person's astigmatism could "cancel" out the distortion allowing the shooter to see a fairly well focused dot.
Finally I can post so I can say Thank You! Excellent posts and information. I just got an M4 the night before last and fortunately found this site from some comments on Florida Shooters Network. Obviously, I will have a lot to learn, sighting being the first element of usability after having a decent platform.
I have not shot an AR-15 for a "while" - let's just say the handguards were triangular and the forward assist "something new" and still debated. Fortunately, I only had to qualify periodically; my primary weapon, though, was too heavy to carry.
I had not thought about the irons as the close sights and USMC03 opened my eyes to that. I have a nice forward vertical with a light, so that is possible. I had an EOtech at one time on another rifle and just didn't like it. I'll look into some of the options, though the idea of irons opens another possibility. May look at the Burris AR-332, which is basically a red dot though with 3x magnification and a BDC. May be too busy a reticle, have to see. Originally, I was thinking of an ACOG and your comments supported some observations and, bottom line, saved me some money.
Thanks again - no substitute for experience - I look forward to learning more.
ennbeegunny15
10-01-11, 17:40
thank you for this very informative post. it answered some questions i had about cqb red dots. i am of the proponent that in a break-in or home invasion type scenario iron sights will be the best option. and also thanks for the xs, tritium sights info. these old eyes need all the help they can get..thanks again.:thank_you2:
Alaskapopo
10-01-11, 17:44
thank you for this very informative post. it answered some questions i had about cqb red dots. i am of the proponent that in a break-in or home invasion type scenario iron sights will be the best option. and also thanks for the xs, tritium sights info. these old eyes need all the help they can get..thanks again.:thank_you2:
Irons are not the best option for this situation red dots are. Irons suck in low light which is usually when people break into your home.
Pat
loganp0916
10-01-11, 19:18
Tag for future reference.
Great detailed info.
Thank you
decodeddiesel
10-01-11, 20:20
thank you for this very informative post. it answered some questions i had about cqb red dots. i am of the proponent that in a break-in or home invasion type scenario iron sights will be the best option. and also thanks for the xs, tritium sights info. these old eyes need all the help they can get..thanks again.:thank_you2:
Have you ever had to actually fight with a gun in low-light? Many of the people on this site have, and the knowledge they pass is invaluable if you have no practical experience in the area.
That said, you seriously need to re-evaluate your opinion. Here's a big clue, Aimpoints and EOTechs are not sitting atop the rifles of professionals because they look cool.
ETA: Also notice the post was written over 4 years ago. Things have changed.
Alaskapopo
10-01-11, 21:12
I had a black bear charge me from less than 20 feet away at night in a dark alley last year. All I had on my shotgun was Ghost Ring sights and and thankfully a weapon mounted light. I did not see the sights. I was target focused. I really wish I had a red dot at that time. My first few shots sucked and after looking at the bear when it was deal it appeared they hit its legs or skimmed the lower portion of his chest. My 4rd and 5th hit home then it turned and then a Trooper who was behind me nailed it in the back with a 45 70 killing it. That was an illistration of irons sucking in low light.
Pat
I did not see the sights. I was target focused.
If that is the case, I don't see how this is an illustration of irons sucking in low light. The same thing would happen in daylight if you focus on the target.
Just because you have an aimpoint you still have to slow down enough to align it and pull the trigger w/o disturbing that alignment. You can watch people on a shooting line not aim. They point the weapon, may even do some rudementary sight alignment, but their targets tell the story. You can see this with either irons or RDS, just even under the light stress of having to qualify, beat a timer, or just wanting to shoot well.
The advantage of using red dots is not having to change your focus from the target back to the sights. Doing fights against how our bodies/eyes would react in that situation.
But don't think training won't overcome it. The problem is it take a lot of training to do so.
ETA: Also notice the post was written over 4 years ago. Things have changed.
Not much has changed really. Aimpoints have been around since the 1990s. Variable scopes are gaining in popularity, the models mentioned in the article are still in production or have newer versions.
I'm not a huge fan of RDS for home defense because w/o my glasses and/or contacts, the aiming point is a big blob. Even worse with an Eotech. A variable scope can be dialed into a dipoter correction, but not really ideal to depend on this for HD. IMO, I like irons and a white light.
When I picture a HD concept carbine, I imagine a lightweight, short weapon with irons and a white light with more ballistic capability than a pistol.
For situations where I would already be wearing glasses or contacts, ie patrol carbine usage, RDS and low power variable scopes are more ideal.
Either way, you have to train. If you are serious about HD use, train in low light as much as possible and try these options out for yourself.
decodeddiesel
10-02-11, 13:35
I'm not a huge fan of RDS for home defense because w/o my glasses and/or contacts, the aiming point is a big blob. Even worse with an Eotech. A variable scope can be dialed into a dipoter correction, but not really ideal to depend on this for HD. IMO, I like irons and a white light.
OK, so you figured out what works best for you. Dandy. The thing that really worries me about your post is that you seem to be saying that you would engage a human being with lethal force, at night, in your home, without even putting your glasses on!? :confused:
I'd agree...if you cannot make out a rds's dot, how exactly are you gonna make out whether your mentally challenged or drunk neighbor stumbled into your home vs. a well armed threat.
OK, so you figured out what works best for you. Dandy. The thing that really worries me about your post is that you seem to be saying that you would engage a human being with lethal force, at night, in your home, without even putting your glasses on!? :confused:
If someone is making a violent tumlutous entry into your home, while you are sleeping, you'll be hard pressed to have enough time to grab your rifle and have the right mindset being awakened like that. Hard guys like you might sleep in plate carriers though...
If a drunken neighbor kicks my door in I would perceive that as a threat. Plenty of people have been killed by drunk people they knew. I don't really get the logic there. Threat assesment is a part of any use of force incident. I wouldn't automatically shoot anyone found in my home. It would be dependant on a number of circumstances, and of course all these things get worked out in a hurry. But, this thread really isn't about that, its about optics for HD use.
My vision isn't that bad w/o my glasses, but it doesn't take much to have a red dot look like a blob, and the Eotechs just become a 65moa mess. Even guys with corrected vision sometimes won't see a perfectly round dot.
Obviously, having time and oppurtunity, I would put my glasses on, and I do sleep in my contacts sometimes. But like I said, my vision isn't that bad anyway, and I'm quite sure I could make out a threat at the distances involved.
Dandy.
decodeddiesel
10-02-11, 17:12
Firstly, this shit is just stupid and completely uncalled for.
Hard guys like you might sleep in plate carriers though...
You know what? There was a time in my life where yes, I had to spend weeks on end sleeping in body armor, and YEARS sleeping with an M4 in condition 3 and body armor next to my "nest" (no, I didn't have a ****ing bed).
I could give a shit what sighting system you choose to use on your carbine.
The fact of the matter is that MOST people would be better served with a sighting system which simply works better in low-light/no-light, ie an Aimpoint.
If you're saying you don't think you are capable of donning your prescription glasses before you deal with a possible threat in your house, then how in the **** will you be able to actually pick up a weapon, place it in a ready condition, then engage a threat?
Never said that or meant to imply I wouldn't by choice or lack some capability to do so, just that there might not be time and I see it as a worst case secnario situation. Placing the weapon in ready condition would take priority, as I can see well enough to make out a threat at hallway distance. I don't see why you're getting wrapped around the axle on that.
I can assure you plenty people have been shot by those who weren't using RDS and only had irons.
I could give a shit what sighting system you choose to use on your carbine.
Then why did you make your pissy response in the first place?
arguing about this stuff is nonsense...come on guys.
decodeddiesel
10-02-11, 19:03
arguing about this stuff is nonsense...come on guys.
:rolleyes:
ETA: Dear Lord! This is your first post outside of the EE and GD in over 18 months? ****ing awesome work.
I am trying to point out for the benefit of the people who read this thread that there are specific advantages in low light gun fighting afforded by the use of a RDS. Even if you can't put on your glasses and the dot is a "big blur".
Dude...really?
Slow down man, its just an internet forum.
Time to edit my ignore list.
Alaskapopo
10-02-11, 23:14
If that is the case, I don't see how this is an illustration of irons sucking in low light. The same thing would happen in daylight if you focus on the target.
Just because you have an aimpoint you still have to slow down enough to align it and pull the trigger w/o disturbing that alignment. You can watch people on a shooting line not aim. They point the weapon, may even do some rudementary sight alignment, but their targets tell the story. You can see this with either irons or RDS, just even under the light stress of having to qualify, beat a timer, or just wanting to shoot well.
The advantage of using red dots is not having to change your focus from the target back to the sights. Doing fights against how our bodies/eyes would react in that situation.
But don't think training won't overcome it. The problem is it take a lot of training to do so.
Not much has changed really. Aimpoints have been around since the 1990s. Variable scopes are gaining in popularity, the models mentioned in the article are still in production or have newer versions.
I'm not a huge fan of RDS for home defense because w/o my glasses and/or contacts, the aiming point is a big blob. Even worse with an Eotech. A variable scope can be dialed into a dipoter correction, but not really ideal to depend on this for HD. IMO, I like irons and a white light.
When I picture a HD concept carbine, I imagine a lightweight, short weapon with irons and a white light with more ballistic capability than a pistol.
For situations where I would already be wearing glasses or contacts, ie patrol carbine usage, RDS and low power variable scopes are more ideal.
Either way, you have to train. If you are serious about HD use, train in low light as much as possible and try these options out for yourself.
With a red dot sight you can shoot with target focus and you don't have to slow down because you are changing your focus from the sights to the target.
Pat
ETA: Dear Lord! This is your first post outside of the EE and GD in over 18 months? ****ing awesome work.
Given that he's right, "...first post outside X and Y subforums in Z time..." doesn't really apply. At no point did forum policy shift to make location and time-frame of posting habits become the litmus test of the validity of an appeal for a discussion to take place in lieu of an agrument.
Folks would do well to stop thinking in terms of "it's the best" absolutes, in this regard. Recall that we're talking about individuals using these things, and that individuals buck trends all the time. Think of a bell-curve; the apex of the hump represents the trend, without eliminating nor invalidating the shit on either side of the hump.
KNOW the capabilities, the pros/cons. MAKE a decision. MAKE a plan as to how to best utilize the pros while mitigating or eliminating the cons. PRACTICE with your chosen gear.
I can assure you plenty people have been shot by those who weren't using RDS and only had irons.
and plenty of dudes have been smoked by single shot pistols and bolt action rifles, but that's not what this thread's about.
if anyone has a vision anomaly that makes the RDS less than the best choice for them, fine. noted. glad you got that worked out...
but that's such a huge minority of case that it really shouldn't be given more than a passing mention here. in 99 and 44/100% of the time, a RDS will be a benefit and that's what Jeff was writing about.
please, let's not get this thread closed over something as stupid as this... (I wonder if it would be possible for the mods to simply delete offending posts rather than locking a valuable resource?..)
Possible, hell.
Forecast is "partly edited, with a chance of Tree of Woe. Accumulations of 2 or more members possible."
decodeddiesel
10-03-11, 13:00
If my posts need to be deleted so be it. I said what I needed to say, and ra2bach summed it up well.
Please allow me to share my experience. I have been in real engagements at night with iron sights with and without a white light, both indoors and outdoors. It sucked. Indoors you have a bit better chance because at the close ranges you can use point shooting, or instinctual shooting. This is NOT a good way to go when you are trying to stop a badguy in your house, especially if you have other people living in the house or if you are in a crowded residential neighborhood. In Iraq or A-stan, in a crappy mudhut it's not as big of a deal. However outdoors at night with just iron sights, tracers, and a white light you are at a severe disadvantage.
The thing that you learn very quickly is that unless you have that light on constantly (which goes against everything you learn training in low-light) as soon as you go from light on to light off your eyes will be saturated and trying to make out those nice blacked out iron sights is one step from impossible. An Aimpoint allows you to immediately see and know the POA of your weapon. It is a nice bright red glowing dot.
Furthermore it has been demonstrated time and time again that under periods of extreme stress using a single illuminated aiming point that allows you to focus on the target is FAR better than trying to use iron sights to do the same thing.
but that's such a huge minority of case that it really shouldn't be given more than a passing mention here. in 99 and 44/100% of the time, a RDS will be a benefit and that's what Jeff was writing about.
Don't get me wrong, I see and appreciate the value of RDS. This thread was about such optics on a home defense carbine. In THAT limited role, was what I was talking about. For general purpose, patrol/urban work etc, I would prefer a T-1, or a Short Dot.
The value of having a RDS isn't lost on me, and i'm not arguing against them.
if anyone has a vision anomaly that makes the RDS less than the best choice for them, fine. noted. glad you got that worked out...
I have no idea why there is so much stick on this vision thing. It was meant as a minor point added to what the original author wrote. Here it is again...
By self defense, I'm going to guess that the place you are most likely to use an AR15 is in defense of your home.
For a home defense carbine I would suggest a simple carbine with iron sights and a white light. This is not the "coolest" answer, but it is probably one of the most practical.
Most guys don't deal with violent criminals on a daily basis and often times on the internet posts like this often generate more responses that are based on "theory" rather than responses that closely follow circumstances that a armed civilian is likely to find himself in.
That being said, I see a lot of threads like this, and most of the responses are based on theory and best case scenerios. Any fighter (boxer, soldier, cop, civilian defending themselves) should always train for the worst case scenerio, not the best case. As the saying goes, prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
If as an armed civilian you are unlucky enough to be the intended victim of a violent crime, you are most likely going to be involved in a defensive or reactive fight, not an offensive fight. The criminal, much like an animal of prey will pick the intended victim, the date, the time, and the place for the attack.
As a victim of a violent crime, you will almost always find yourself dealing with the situation on the criminals terms. You will be reacting to his actions. As is proof in the OODA loop, actions are always quicker than reactions.
If a criminal kicks in your front door to committ a home invasion robbery, he isn't going to sit in the front living room like a prom date and wait for you (the victim) to turn on your optic, put on your multi-cam plate carrier, and get ready for the fight. He is there it dominate you and to control you and to get what he wants (steal something of monitary value, take a human life, exact revenge, etc) In most cases you are barely going to have enough time to roll out of bed and grab your gun (much less turn on an optic, mess with a sling, insert a mag and chamber a round, etc) before the bad guy is in the same room as you. Crimes like this happen VERY quickly.
Sorry for the rant, but these are things you may want to consider prior to deciding if an optic is the best route.
glad you got that worked out...
You take pissy swipes then write about deleting offending posts? Come on man.
FWIW, somewhere between 30% and 60% of the population exhibit astigmatism, which makes RDS less than ideal. (I googled and found both numbers and spanned them...) I'm among that group, and am trying to decide if a fast blur for close range outweighs the real lack of precision for longer range - it's much more of a problem for those with that eyesight problem than for those without it, and it's not a small part of the population.
I'd sure prefer facts and arguments to assurance that the other folks are wrong, which is seldom the case, anyway. The Aimpoint argument is easiest, as there isn't much to compare with it, with EOTech likely looking to need a depot level maintenance facility. On the other hand, I'm finding the 1-4x scopes nearly impossible to choose among, as the scopes with good qualities are much, much more expensive than the RDS.
Alaskapopo
10-03-11, 23:49
FWIW, somewhere between 30% and 60% of the population exhibit astigmatism, which makes RDS less than ideal. (I googled and found both numbers and spanned them...) I'm among that group, and am trying to decide if a fast blur for close range outweighs the real lack of precision for longer range - it's much more of a problem for those with that eyesight problem than for those without it, and it's not a small part of the population.
I'd sure prefer facts and arguments to assurance that the other folks are wrong, which is seldom the case, anyway. The Aimpoint argument is easiest, as there isn't much to compare with it, with EOTech likely looking to need a depot level maintenance facility. On the other hand, I'm finding the 1-4x scopes nearly impossible to choose among, as the scopes with good qualities are much, much more expensive than the RDS.
I have astigmatism and for the ranges where a Red Dot is ideal its not an issue. For small targets and precision shooting your better off with a scope.
Pat
Simply having astigmatism does not negate the utility of a RDS. The military and LEO communities reflect society in general and for the most part the RDS works as intended. I have 20/18 vision with a slight uncorrected astigmatism and the RDS is the way to go. My wife has corrected vision with a bad astigmatism and sees only a bundle of grapes through my Aimpoints. An Acog TA44SG works much better for her. This is still much faster for her than irons. The slight 1.5X magnification is all it takes. If someone doesn't prefer an RDS that's their choice and I wouldn't try to change their mind, for them. For the vast majority of shooters the RDS is the best answer we currently have.
A rather intresting article from Kyle Defoor. This is the first time I actually read numbers from a reliable source as to speed.
http://www.kyledefoor.com/2010/02/iron-sight-project.html#comments
http://www.kyledefoor.com/2010/12/iron-sights-for-almost-year.html?m=1
Revisited this thread.....still great info
Revisited this thread.....still great info
Not bad considering that this thread would currently be right about at the limits of the battery life of a Comp M4S left on at the manual-tested setting.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.