The "Best" All-Around Optic for your AR?

[biohazard1717]

The TA44 definitely seems to be a love it or hate it thing. I just got mine with the ACSS reticle (reticle was way smaller than I expected it but it's not too bad) and tried it out today and had a favorable impression of it. I try to think of it more as a "super red dot" than a mini-ACOG.

[ClangClang]

If you require any magnification, then the answer is a lightweight 1-6 LPVO, no question. More versatile, more durable, not reliant on batteries, usable for everything from blazing fast hosing to relatively precise shots at 500yds (assuming the barrel and ammo are up to the task, of course). A red dot plus magnifier is flat out obsolete.

If lightweight and battle-ready/SHTF-grade are your primary parameters, then any of the following, in my general order of preference:

Leupold MK6 - 16 oz
Kahles k16i - 15 oz
Swarovski z6 - 15 oz
Nightforce NX8 - 17 oz

Pair it with a sturdy but lightweight mount and a set of quality folding BUIS (either KAC or MBUS Pro) and you have the most battle-ready carbine sighting system available today, hands down.

[Biggy]

For *my* needs and shooting distances, I prefer a lightweight but durable SFP 1-6x LPV that has a simple easy to use and uncluttered reticle and has good RD intensity. I still like RDS sights on small PDW and entry and house clearing type weapons, but for everything else prefer the LPV scopes, where I think their benefits outweigh their negatives. Also, I agree with Kyle, where he states in the vid below, that LPV scopes with 6x and under he prefers SFP reticles and FFP reticles in scopes that have 8x and above magnification.

Kyle Defoor on the Benefits of Running Low Power Variable Optics (link below)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzPlsr5vjaM

[Canonshooter]

There is a bewildering array of great optics for the AR platform. IMO, selecting the best one for you boils down to (1) the intended use of the rifle and (2) personal needs and/or preference.

In my case as a civilian;

• The AR is a general-purpose grab 'n go rifle. My recreational shooting takes place in the 50 to 300 yard range, and if ever needed for a self-defense scenario, that is the most likely distance at which targets might be engaged due to the heavily wooded, rolling terrain I live in.
• I EDC a handgun for the self-defense scenarios I am most likely to find myself in.
• I have a considerable investment in a .308 custom bolt action (.3 MOA capable) that I enjoy ringing steel at long range with. I don't need that capability in an AR, which opens options for a simpler, lighter weight optic.
• I have astigmatism so a RDS is not the optimal choice for me, and therefore prefer an etched reticle.
• I absolutely need an adjustable diopter (eye piece) which makes anything without one (like an ACOG) problematic.
• Since I don't have any night vision gear, an illuminated reticle is of limited value to me. If I can see my target clearly enough to make a positive ID, I can see an etched reticle clearly enough to make a shot. If I can't see the target due to low light level, I can use a WML to illuminate it, at which point the non-illuminated reticle is also clearly visible.
• I have owned both heavy scopes/mounts and lightweight ones. I very much prefer the lighter weight and is a major consideration for me in optic selection.
• I have owned variable power and fixed power scopes. My AR and precision bolt action both wear fixed power scopes, which is my personal preference due to their simple design and optical-performance/cost ratio. At comparable cost, I would also consider the fixed power scope more rugged and durable.

So my suggestion is to define the role of the rifle, then select the optic based on your eyesight needs and use expectations. This is why there can be no single "best all round optic" to fit every shooter, but every shooter can individually determine what works best for them. In that regard, we have plenty of great options to choose from.

[Dr. Bullseye]

I thought I had started a thread like this before, but all I could find were threads on specific optics.

I am at a crossroads.

Every optic I try has advantages and disadvantages as one would expect, but in your opinion is there one military or SHTF grade optic suitable in all situations and that has limitations you can easily live with?

After trying red dots, reflex sights, variables, and a smattering of gimmicks like the C-More sight, I've decided I think the Aimpoint micros or Trijicon MRO's fit the bill.

--Reflex sights, although not battery-powered, have reticle washout issues.
--Battery powered sights like the Aimpoint have a long enough battery life to overcome the fact that they are not "battery-free"
--Variables have a lot of utility but tend to be heavy. Let them manufacture a 1-4 variable with Tritium and fiber optic and only weighs as much as an
Aimpoint micro--and I'M THERE.

I actually emailed Trijicon asking them to make a 1X optic with simple reticle and not needing battery power. They replied back that they don't reveal future product plans, but I found it interesting that the RMR came out a few months later.



So, what say you? What optic do you think has the best overall benefits versus its limitations.

PLEASE BE SPECIFIC.

I start these threads to get specific information. Please don't just say you like sucn-and-such and leave it at that. Please tell us why you love an optic or why others are inadequate.

If you post just to agree with someone, please state that you agree with what particular point they made and don't just post "I like such and such optic too."

What are your parameters? What are you going to use this optic for: daytime and nighttime, distance, price, you clearly don't like batteries ?? The Kyle Defoor video posted by Biggy and other posters have stated the argument for low power variable optics but as the video says, a military grade scope may be $1000.00. Is that OK? Defoor's Nightforce costs over twice that but he is a professional trainer and former sniper. Hell, I am thinking about home defense and a SHTF general use scope. Tell us what you expect your scope to do?

[Wake27]

I think the whole “know your purpose” thing gets overblown. As I said, my wife’s gun has to be light, so it gets a T2. Bit anything else, at least for a general purpose gun as the OP stated, will benefit strongly from a solid LOVO. Shooting through the optic with NODs is a huge niche, and as stated, many people are easily as fast with them as RDS. Unless due to weight or price, quality LPVOs are the winner. And with the P4Xi, price isn’t even a huge factor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[daddyusmaximus]

If you require any magnification, then the answer is a lightweight 1-6 LPVO, no question. More versatile, more durable, not reliant on batteries, usable for everything from blazing fast hosing to relatively precise shots at 500yds (assuming the barrel and ammo are up to the task, of course). A red dot plus magnifier is flat out obsolete.

If lightweight and battle-ready/SHTF-grade are your primary parameters, then any of the following, in my general order of preference:

Leupold MK6 - 16 oz
Kahles k16i - 15 oz
Swarovski z6 - 15 oz
Nightforce NX8 - 17 oz

Pair it with a sturdy but lightweight mount and a set of quality folding BUIS (either KAC or MBUS Pro) and you have the most battle-ready carbine sighting system available today, hands down.

It's not a matter of "obsolete".

It's still dependent on the primary role of the weapon. The LVPO is a new tool, for a different purpose, not a replacement for the old tool.

First off, you can't pair an LVPO with a NV device as easily... Anyone invested in NV already would have to switch to an LVPO, then turn around reinvest in all new NV equipment as well. I'm not sure any of the systems out there for daylight scopes are as rugged as the military units most of us are used to either....

Second, if your primary role is close quarters work, or in an urban environment, the red dot still rules. It's not a "scope" in the same since that an LVPO is. It's a "sight" The eyebox is much more forgiving. When you find yourself in an uncomfortable position behind cover, you don't have to work so hard twisting your neck, moving the gun around, taking as much time to acquire the dot so you won't get that scope shadow from having your eye ever so slightly off center with the sight. A red dot will always be faster at CQB then any LVPO on 1x... Putting your face EXACTLY in the same spot in the eyebox to ovoid scope shadow, no matter the shooting position, takes that little bit of extra time that the red dot doesn't require. The magnifiers, however, do have the same limitations as a traditional scope, so you still have to take your time with distant shots...

So the question is, how often will you require magnification? If you are likely to engage distant targets most often, then yes, an LVPO would be the right tool for the job. If the main focus is close, but you still want the capability to engage distant targets... then the red dot with the magnifier is the right tool for the job.

[Wake27]

A red dot will always be faster at CQB then any LVPO on 1x...

I’m not so sure about that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dr. Bullseye]

It's not a matter of "obsolete".

It's still dependent on the primary role of the weapon. The LVPO is a new tool, for a different purpose, not a replacement for the old tool.

First off, you can't pair an LVPO with a NV device as easily... Anyone invested in NV already would have to switch to an LVPO, then turn around reinvest in all new NV equipment as well. I'm not sure any of the systems out there for daylight scopes are as rugged as the military units most of us are used to either....

Second, if your primary role is close quarters work, or in an urban environment, the red dot still rules. It's not a "scope" in the same since that an LVPO is. It's a "sight" The eyebox is much more forgiving. When you find yourself in an uncomfortable position behind cover, you don't have to work so hard twisting your neck, moving the gun around, taking as much time to acquire the dot so you won't get that scope shadow from having your eye ever so slightly off center with the sight. A red dot will always be faster at CQB then any LVPO on 1x... Putting your face EXACTLY in the same spot in the eyebox to ovoid scope shadow, no matter the shooting position, takes that little bit of extra time that the red dot doesn't require. The magnifiers, however, do have the same limitations as a traditional scope, so you still have to take your time with distant shots...

So the question is, how often will you require magnification? If you are likely to engage distant targets most often, then yes, an LVPO would be the right tool for the job. If the main focus is close, but you still want the capability to engage distant targets... then the red dot with the magnifier is the right tool for the job.

OK. We all know our home's distances for HD. There was the Texas Church gunman who was shot by a neighbor with an AR. That was what across the street so maybe 30 yards max.? I live in dense woods in the summer and have no visibility beyond 100 yards--if that. What are combat distances really? People always say they are closer than you would assume. How many times have you military guys been shot at from ranges where you felt a red dot inadequate? I know there is the issue of accuracy at say 50 yards plus where the opposing guy is partially covered and you only get a portion of his body exposed. But what is this--how often do you need magnification in combat vs. speed and what level of magnification would you or have you used?

[Don Quijote]

A red dot will always be faster at CQB then any LVPO on 1x... Putting your face EXACTLY in the same spot in the eyebox to ovoid scope shadow, no matter the shooting position, takes that little bit of extra time that the red dot doesn't require.

Not sure which LPVOs you've used to declare that your eye must always be exactly in the same spot every time. Certainly you haven't used the ones I've owned, with their very large and forgiving exit pupil and generous eye relief (the correct terms instead of the lame "eyebox")

On top of that, who cares if your face isn't in the same exact spot on the stock at CQB distances? POI changes due to parallax error, while real, are inconsequential when shooting at a person 5 - 10 yards away.

As for speed, my shot timer begs to differ.

I'd also like to address the need for magnification with an analogy. I've never needed a handgun to fight someone in the 52 years I've been alive, but I still hump one.