Having a hard time deciding 1x6 or 2.5x10?

[Obscenejesster]

I'm in the process of building a RECCE and I can't decide whether I want the close quarter abilities of a 1x or the long range ability of a 10x.

I will be starting 3 gun this year and I might end up using this rifle but my main purpose for the build is SHTF. If the S ever does hit the fan, I want a very versatile rifle capable of hunting or stopping threats out to 500 yards or as close as 10. In my thinking however, I do not think there will be a lot of close quarter combat if the S ever does hit the fan. I would imagine you'd want to stop the threats before they get inside of 50 yards especially if you're trying to protect your shelter. I'm also thinking the 2.5x10 will be better for identifying threats while keeping a greater distance between you and them.

I already have the barrel for it and it's a 16" Rainier MEDCON.

I've seen videos of people taking out targets at 10 yards very quickly at 2.5 and I will be running 45 degree irons.

So what you guys think?

[teutonicpolymer]

I would get the 1-6x

500m is still doable at 6x but close in is not fun with magnification

[SOW_0331]

What's your budget?

My personal experience has been that magnifications of 1-3x are somewhat...useless. Unless you are shooting coins off someone's shoulders, there's very little need that I've come across that made me yearn for a low power or no power magnification. Between 20-50m, you should have plenty of time to find your reticle at 3-4x, within 5-10m you're not going to be using your offset irons a whole lot....

The benefits of a higher magnification however, especially in some doomsday scenario, are far greater. Being able to see your enemy, and what he is bringing to the fight, at long distances can be the difference between evading to fight another day or dying from underestimation. Even with some 10x optics I've found myself wishing for more, even at 300-400m distances.

[Leaveammoforme]

The 1-6x would be my choice. Chances are good you will use it in 3G. Chances are slim you will use it in the zombie apocalypse.

[jesuvuah]

I have owned and used both. 1-6 does get the job done, but honestly I did not really see a huge advantage over a 1-4. I currently am running a 2.5-10. On 2.5 I have no problem doing close range. It pretty much resembles an acog on this power. If you have your scope on 10 power, it is not so great at close range but can still be used, but that is why I through a set of offset irons on it. Having the greater magnification is very nice on the longer ranges.

[uffdaphil]

I'd go go with a 1-4 for now. So many good choices these days.

But I think your assumptions about SHTF are backwards unless you are rural and will have sufficient people with you to put out LPs for early warning. In a metro area you will have desperate/ill-intentioned groups sneaking about, using cover until relatively close. Lots of other implications of firing at a distance on a group that are more appropriate to another forum section. Think flanking for one.

[Obscenejesster]

What's your budget?

My personal experience has been that magnifications of 1-3x are somewhat...useless. Unless you are shooting coins off someone's shoulders, there's very little need that I've come across that made me yearn for a low power or no power magnification. Between 20-50m, you should have plenty of time to find your reticle at 3-4x, within 5-10m you're not going to be using your offset irons a whole lot....

The benefits of a higher magnification however, especially in some doomsday scenario, are far greater. Being able to see your enemy, and what he is bringing to the fight, at long distances can be the difference between evading to fight another day or dying from underestimation. Even with some 10x optics I've found myself wishing for more, even at 300-400m distances.

That's exactly what I was thinking and I've been doing a lot of it. My budget is about $800 which is why I am looking at Vortex's new 2.5x10x32mm. I looked through one a couple days ago and I gotta say, I was impressed. The glass was nice, the build quality and turrets felt amazing and the illumination was easily seen during the middle of the day outside. Granted, it was a partially cloudy day. I like what they did with the FFP in this scope. At 10x the reticle is perfectly sized. Thin enough for precision shots but easily seen. At 2.5, the reticle becomes a nice thick crosshair that can be picked up pretty quick. The only thing I didn't like was the small eye box at 10x but at 8x it was great. I could see myself using 8 power if multiple targets in the distance needs to be engaged and using 10 times if all I need is one precise shot.

I know a lot of us gun guy's are also what some people call "Doomsday Preppers". I am pretty big into prepping and I have been thinking long and hard about what optic is going to sit on top of my SHTF main.

Here's why I am leaning towards the 2.5x10. I am thinking that most engagements during a SHTF is going to be beyond 25 yards. In most situations, you're not going to want a threat to get any closer. The 10 power would really come in handy when holding down your shelter. It will allow you to identify threats further out and if need be, take them out with better accuracy. In a situation where multiple threats are approaching, you're going to want to be able to take them out as far away as possible to give yourself enough time to engage each target without them knowing where the rounds are flying from. I already know that I can be pretty quick with irons inside of 100 yards and I do think the 45 degree irons would be a necessity if I went with the 2.5x10 just in case a threat gets a little closer than I'd like.

[Obscenejesster]

I'd go go with a 1-4 for now. So many good choices these days.

But I think your assumptions about SHTF are backwards unless you are rural and will have sufficient people with you to put out LPs for early warning. In a metro area you will have desperate/ill-intentioned groups sneaking about, using cover until relatively close. Lots of other implications of firing at a distance on a group that are more appropriate to another forum section. Think flanking for one.

I am in a rural area and would like to stay in a Rural area if the SHTF.

[uffdaphil]

I am in a rural area and would like to stay in a Rural area if the SHTF.

Then it sounds like you are on the right track. My 2-12 VX-6 has great glass and with 2x I think I can skip the offsets. As I am in the city and the armory for five sibs, I also have multiple RDs and a couple TR24 1-4s.

[Failure2Stop]

A 1-6x will cover more practical applications of 5.56 in realistic conditions than a 2.5-10x.
The gap can be closed at the extremes of magnification if the 2.5-10x has a properly selected SFP reticle, however, it will cause you to give up mid-range magnification level applications due to the reticle not giving much usable feedback as far as hard data.

The issue is that most people using optics don't really know what they are doing, how to use a good contemporary reticle, what makes a certain reticle better than another, what it's like to really need to shoot fast without giving up accuracy in less than favorable conditions, and therefore are willing to cede certain aspects of performance that those with advanced knowledge/skill/performance requirements are not. I'm not calling anyone out, simply pointing out that there are a lot of different ways to look at the problem, and that in a dizzying array of responses it is generally better to identify those that are performing at a high level in the critical applications that you want to maximize and listen to them.

The fact of the matter is that all optics are a compromise at this point.