Discussion: 1-8 ATACR applications for SOCOM/most ideal weapon platform for DMR role

[mark5pt56]

Look, knock it off, share some good information so folks can learn. Last of the parenting.

[WS6]

I have the NX8 on a 12.5 5.56 and it is great.

I just wanted better optical properties. It cost me footprint and a few oz.

[ryanm]

Does anyone know the why or the logic behind USSOCOM specing their ATACR riflescopes with the custom BDC combat reticle? I have heard that at some point this reticle option might be available for everyone. How does the ATACR compare with the new S&B DFP LPV scope? IMHO, if doing a lot of work past 400yds, 8x or more magnification is not only desirable but is needed, Now, if you rarely or never go past 400yds, a good 1-6x SFP LPV scope is probably a better choice and will save you a bunch of money and in some cases will save you 4-5 ounces in scope weight. Also, if I were shooting at 500-600 yds or farther a lot of the time, I would definitely choose at least a 16 inch or longer barrel, but then depending on the scenario or mission, I might also prefer to just step up to a heavier caliber, for it’s ballistic advantage at distance.

Wanted to chime in on S&B question. I prefer the short dot in every respect. Optical clarity, eyebox,FOV, illumination, reticle choices, turret feel, weight of scope. The edge to edge view is amazing, almost no bezel, just a reticle floating in front of you. That said, both ATACR and NX8 are very good scopes, S&B just feels like the next level—especially the CC version. I would imagine the mil choice came down to cost vs benefit and ATACR is damn good.

Also want to note eyebox in more detail. S&B CC at 1x is very close to Aimpoint in terms of picking up dot. At 1x, I don’t know of a bette LPVO on the market. When zooming in, all 1-8 get a little finicky at max zoom in terms of eyebox. I think the ATACR and CQBSS benefit from the larger tube size and are more forgiving at 8x. In 30mm, the S&B has good eyebox but I wouldn’t say it’s a huge step up from the NX8. Zoomed you need to take the change into account.

Overall I almost consider myself a Nightforce whore—for the price, they have incredible value and performance. I own a few other high(er)end scopes—but I ask myself is this really that much better in terms of cost? Most of the time I end up with another NF box in the attic.

[Boba Fett v2]

I think I have some solid answers to your questions. First, my background, and what I feel gives me insight into your question and the ability to answer it. I literally just spent last weekend in Texas shooting a Dual Role Carbine Class with Jack Leuba from KAC. We were doing and shooting the exact rifles you are asking about. I can personally attest to putting about 650 rounds of Federal GMM 168gr down range at distances from 5yds to 845 yds. The ATACR was VERY well represented at this class. I have one, but I admit to taking more magnification to the class. I rolled a KAC 16” .308. Specifically the ACC model. I used my S&B 3-20 PMII with an Aimpoint T2 in a 45* offset. This rifle was DEADLY from 5-845yds. There were about 3-4 guys using LPV’s. Mostly ATACR 1-8, but one guy had a Leupold MK8. Interestingly, he wanted an ATACR by the end of day 2.
On to the shooting. Day one had us in the pouring rain, fog, and very dense, wet air. We shot to check, establish solid zeros, then we started walking out to distance. I had my elevations figured out fine because of my Applied Ballistics in my phone. Jack was calling trace and giving wind corrections. SEVERAL guys got out to 600-700 with their LPV’s. I think the only limitation was the dense fog and conditions. The LPV’s just didn’t have the horsepower to cut the fog and see as far. My 3-20 started to be a tiny advantage just because I could resolve farther. This is in NO WAY a slam on the ATACR, or LPV’s in general, it’s just a fact that at 850yds, a 8X needs more clear conditions to resolve than a 20X S&B.
Day two had us enjoying better weather, and the curriculum was more 5-25yds. This is where the LPV’s has it all over me. I was forced to rotate my rifle 45* and use my Aimpoint. The 1-8 crowd was able to set down on 1X, turn the ATACR’s incredibly good illumination on and ROCK. Shooting on the move: forward, backward, laterally, fast, and faster. The LPV really shines here.

So what’s my take away? LPV’s are 100% solid, within certain limitations. For a .308, where you’re going to make your money from contact out to about 600yds, they are hard to beat. A FFP 1-8 with solid illumination that only weighs 21oz. is about a dream come true. Do they have a downside? Of course they do, everything does in some way. My 3-20 did better past 650yds...BUT....it’s significantly bigger, and weighs 32oz. That’s a big difference on a 16” Carbine.

If you’re looking for a “do it all” gun, be it a 5.56, or a .308, from 5-650yds I’m all day looking for my ATACR. If I anticipate needing to shoot past 650, I’m looking for more power from my scope....but then, I’m probably looking for something besides my .308 Carbine too. If “mission drives the gear train”, then for my 16” guns, I will GLADLY be rocking my ATACR 1-8.
Sorry this is kinda long, but it’s a great question that takes a minute to answer.

Hopefully BobbaFett will see this and chime in. He was there with his ATACR and was kicking some ass with it. He can offer some info from his perspective.

Spot on assessment. I will say that given the conditions I was still able to pick up the 800 targets, albeit it would've been nice to have more on the top end for engagements beyond the 600 yard line. If we weren't contending with adverse weather conditions I'm confident I could've pushed it out to 800. There were other factors at play that made it a bit more challenging on the firing line, which include shooting with new prescription glasses. Admittedly, I should've factored that into the equation ahead of time considering it was my first time shooting out to distance wearing glasses which limited visibility due to weather induced obstruction. Nevertheless, the ATACR's ability to resolve under harsh conditions was nothing short of impressive. As mentioned, another shooter running a Mark 8 CQBSS was ready to offload it for an ATACR. In fact, the shooter contacted me a couple days ago and informed me he did just that. The ACC/CC's primary role for me is a "mountain gun" that I can take along on long walks through bear and lion country and as a fighting rifle for unforeseen domestic contingencies. The ATACR primarily stays at 1x, but it's nice to have the option to reach out as necessary. If the rifle's primary role was long range target engagement then I likely would've opted for an APC/PC with something like a 4-16x ATACR, 3.6-18x Mark 5HD or similar MPVOs. However, the ACC/CC is more than accurate enough to meet the challenge if stretching it out to distance and being CL is a bonus. Do I think the 1-8x ATACR is the absolute end-all-be-all solution? Negative. BUT it still does offer a lot of capability if expectations are managed going into it.

My experience mirrors Vegasshooter's in that 8x LPVO's will take me to 600y with a 16" 5.56 or better. 700y with an 18" SPR or 16" 308 is doable. My max is 880 with an SR25 ACC and an 8x S&B. However, this is not in combat. These are competition style field settings with scale 1/3 and 2/3 IPSC scale. This is not camo'd, moving opposition using cover and shooting back. Again, these are my experience and context.

I think your post delves into deeper issues of what is going to be required of SOCOM in the years to come. Many say we're likely going back to a near-peer threat in urban areas at some point soon. If that's the case, 800+ yards doesn't matter much but precise fire still matters as does cqb.

Increased urban and subterranean warfare is the future of combat operations for the foreseeable future. As a guy who's combat experience has been exclusively MOUT, I would have loved to have had the capability a 14.5 CC + LPVO offers. Much of the fighting we did was from rooftop to rooftop. It wasn't something that was doctrinally ingrained in us, but something we quickly adapted to. This is where the ACOG shined. While not the ideal CQB solution (as you are aware can be used as such in a pinch using bindon), it did allow us to be more combat effective in that regard. While 800 yards might not be concern for the guys on the ground (why we have sniper/DMR overwatch), it's an entirely different ballgame when you're on top of a building fighting guys who are engaging you a few blocks away. Nevertheless, I'm of the mindset that we shouldn't train to certain conditions exclusively, but train to be more adaptive and prepared to fight in any given environment. Not discounting the necessity to train under various conditions given certain environments.

With regards to the BDC in the SOCOM ATACRs, we like to keep shit simple. When bullets are flying it's just easier to laze a target or guesstimate range and apply the correct drop.

I need an ATACR in my life. It checks a lot of boxes. This or a Leupy Mk 8

Part of me was saving for an S&B to enjoy when I am 60 and blind. But this checks a lot of boxes for mere pigging with my SR25.

I'd skip the Leupy Mark 8 entirely. And if I didn't already have the ATACR, which I'm very happy with, I'd be all over the new S&B Dual CC.

[BallisticHarmony]

Spot on assessment. I will say that given the conditions I was still able to pick up the 800 targets, albeit it would've been nice to have more on the top end for engagements beyond the 600 yard line. If we weren't contending with adverse weather conditions I'm confident I could've pushed it out to 800. There were other factors at play that made it a bit more challenging on the firing line, which include shooting with new prescription glasses. Admittedly, I should've factored that into the equation ahead of time considering it was my first time shooting out to distance wearing glasses. Nevertheless, the ATACR's ability to resolve under harsh conditions was nothing short of impressive. As mentioned, another user running a Mark 8 CQBSS was ready to offload it for an ATACR. In fact, the shooter contacted me a couple days ago and informed me he did just that. The ACC/CC's primary role for me is a "mountain gun" that I can take along on long walks through bear and lion country and as a fighting rifle for unforeseen domestic contingencies. The ATACR stays primarily stays at 1x, but it's nice to have the option to reach out as necessary. If the rifle's primary role was long range target engagement then I likely would've opted for an APC/PC with something like a 4-16x ATACR, 3.6-18x Mark 5HD or similar MPVOs. However, the ACC/CC is more than accurate enough to meet the challenge if stretching it out to distance and being CL is a bonus. Do I think the 1-8x ATACR is the absolute end-all-be-all solution? Negative. BUT it still does offer a lot of capability if expectations are managed going into it.

Thank you so much for your much appreciated input, I never thought I'd be so excited about getting into the 7.62 carbine world but it just makes sense with how capable the optics are now and how fine-tuned the gas systems have gotten for shorter barrels. Add a UBR 2.0 stock and KAC bipod and I think I'll be in overmatch heaven.

[ryanm]

Can’t say enough good things about that KAC bipod. I wish they were cheaper, it’s a very flexible and useful tool!!! Way more than just a rifle kickstand.

[Core781]

For 7.62 I would recommend 1-10x optic or more for dedicated overwatch roles. For 5.56 1-8x is good for barrels 16" and under. Would recommend Mil or MOA holdovers in the reticle for overwatch dedicated optics. For 5.56 CQB I would not recommend a 16" barrel, nor a 1-8x optic. I would recommend 10.3-14.5" barrels with micro red dot or holosights. A 14.5" with a 1-8x and a red dot mounted on top is a versatile setup for CQB and average engagement ranges. KAC barrels are good stuff: KAC is ahead of the curve, always has been IMO. CHF barrels are always better than stainless for long range and short range. I like 416R barrels if they are quality made, or better yet CHF Ordinance Steel variants. Chrome lined barrels are better for all but the most precision length 18"+ barrels. FNH CHF chrome lined barrels are the cats meow in 14.5" SOCOM cuts them down to 10.3" for CQB. My opinion is the most versatile design is an SPR or Recce design. 16-18" qualifty barrel ideally CHF chrome lined precision made barrel. 7.62 needs 18" imho, and 5.56 benefits from 18" also. SPR with 1-10x optic with a simple mil holdovers, a SPR type mount, lightweight bipod, and a micro red dot adapter like Larues SPR mount with 20moa and red dot adapter. Muzzle device is mission specific. You can consider a MK12 upgrade to MK.224 and you have some serious range in a lightweight package.

[BallisticHarmony]

For 7.62 I would recommend 1-10x optic or more for dedicated overwatch roles. For 5.56 1-8x is good for barrels 16" and under. Would recommend Mil or MOA holdovers in the reticle for overwatch dedicated optics. For 5.56 CQB I would not recommend a 16" barrel, nor a 1-8x optic. I would recommend 10.3-14.5" barrels with micro red dot or holosights. A 14.5" with a 1-8x and a red dot mounted on top is a versatile setup for CQB and average engagement ranges. KAC barrels are good stuff: KAC is ahead of the curve, always has been IMO. CHF barrels are always better than stainless for long range and short range. I like 416R barrels if they are quality made, or better yet CHF Ordinance Steel variants. Chrome lined barrels are better for all but the most precision length 18"+ barrels. FNH CHF chrome lined barrels are the cats meow in 14.5" SOCOM cuts them down to 10.3" for CQB. My opinion is the most versatile design is an SPR or Recce design. 16-18" qualifty barrel ideally CHF chrome lined precision made barrel. 7.62 needs 18" imho, and 5.56 benefits from 18" also. SPR with 1-10x optic with a simple mil holdovers, a SPR type mount, lightweight bipod, and a micro red dot adapter like Larues SPR mount with 20moa and red dot adapter. Muzzle device is mission specific. You can consider a MK12 upgrade to MK.224 and you have some serious range in a lightweight package.

Interesting thoughts, what’s your background

[Core781]

Navy VBSS/SWI SSEWS: Cold War, OEF, OIF. NRA CRSO.