G&R Tactical
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Best drills for testing different optic speed?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    11,096
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by docsherm View Post
    Currently the only set up with an EOTECH that i have is my 300 BO for Subs with a can. All of the rest have some variation of the 1-4,6,8 on them.
    Really...my EOtech is on a fartaround PCC. my pigger will get RMR'd. That's it for me. As for anything else, PID is key plus people dont like to be shot at as Nooneshowmonkey pointed out and they try to cheat by concealing themselves, finding cover, creating distance bleh.

    Personally the NX8 didnt seem as bad as a leupy per eyebox. Steiner has a 1-5 but $$$$ I liked dat Steiner. If I were rich past being rich in tge Lord; I'd be getting hella Kahles 1-6s

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Black Hills, South Dakota
    Posts
    2,519
    Feedback Score
    0
    As others have suggested incorporate a distance shooting component to your evaluation standard in addition to all the close up work. At least if you have access to a range that can accomplish that task. Personally Iím 10 minutes away from a range with berms or target placement points at 25, 50, 100, 200, 300, and 800 yards. Plus a hillside covered in rocks in the 400-600 yard range (I range them and shoot them). So Iím totally on the LPVO wagon at this point with a NF 1-4 on my SR-15, Iíve been able to reliably get first round impacts on the evil rocks at 550 yards with the little 1-4, in the wind. Canít say the same for my old Aimpoint Comp M2, and the NF is not so slow up close that I am going to get killed in daí streets. My performance differential up close between the two is very narrow. Thereís a reason LPVOís dominate in 2 and 3 gun competition.

    Another interesting component you could work into an evaluation standard would be ďno shootĒ targets that are not highly contrasted with allowable targets. I think you would find as distance increases the ability to resolve the targets, or even find them at all, will heavily favor the LPVO. A half dozen cardboard IPSC torsos, a stencil, and some slightly darker shade of brown spray paint could make for a very interesting course of fire at the 200-300 yard lines. Particularly in evening light, or early morning.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Akron, Ohio
    Posts
    416
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    I really wanted to make the switch and figured the LPVO really had some advantages that I could take from until I ran it in a low light class and under those conditions. Based on wanting it to play a primary role for me as a sighting system I realized it cant or at least when things get dark. It just becomes too slow no matter how much light you run.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    DFW, TEXAS
    Posts
    3,825
    Feedback Score
    242 (99%)
    Quote Originally Posted by crossgun View Post
    I really wanted to make the switch and figured the LPVO really had some advantages that I could take from until I ran it in a low light class and under those conditions. Based on wanting it to play a primary role for me as a sighting system I realized it cant or at least when things get dark. It just becomes too slow no matter how much light you run.
    How so? Was the scope illumination not on? Please elaborate on the issues you had.
    In no way do I make any money from anyone related to the firarms industry.


    "I have never heard anyone say after a firefight that I wish that I had not taken so much ammo.", ME

    "Texas can make it without the United States, but the United States can't make it without Texas !", General Sam Houston

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    2,829
    Feedback Score
    91 (100%)
    I have had no issues running LPVO’s. Especially on anything 12.5 or longer and really like my XTRII 1-8 on my Noveske, 14.5, in part because the broken reticle in the XTR is similar to my EOTech ring and also the range it gives me over other options. I’ve ran 1-4’s and 6’s on my 12” LaRue’s 12.5 DD’s and I like that setup.. That said I still prefer an EOTech on my dedicated CQB guns. The exception is my PDW which has an RMR in a LaRue Iron Dot mount. Either path you take doc is dead on the money. You have to train, train, and train. It takes training to flesh out strengths and weaknesses and train out if possible and it also takes a good optic.
    "Texas has yet to learn submission to any oppression, come from what source it may."

    - Sam Houston

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    25,962
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    I'm still struggling to find the need for the LBGTO sight. These fragile, bohemoth things on fighting ARs just don't make sense to me. The Nightforce variant is at least manageable in size, but as someone pointed out, a bright red dot when dialed down would make it faster for me.
    "You people have too much time on your hands." - scottryan

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,126
    Feedback Score
    39 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by crossgun View Post
    I really wanted to make the switch and figured the LPVO really had some advantages that I could take from until I ran it in a low light class and under those conditions. Based on wanting it to play a primary role for me as a sighting system I realized it cant or at least when things get dark. It just becomes too slow no matter how much light you run.
    My Kahles 1-6x24i and Surefire M600DF worked great in the low light class I took a couple months ago.

    I don't see much speed disadvantage with my Kahles over my Aimpoints for the majority of my shooting. The one exception I can think of is shooting through barricades while in irregular/unnatural positions, other that you're dealing with additional weight and a larger footprint.
    E pluribus unum

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Black Hills, South Dakota
    Posts
    2,519
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by markm View Post
    I'm still struggling to find the need for the LBGTO sight. These fragile, bohemoth things on fighting ARs just don't make sense to me. The Nightforce variant is at least manageable in size, but as someone pointed out, a bright red dot when dialed down would make it faster for me.
    Have you tried one?

    For a general purpose carbine I think the LPVO has some merit, because it can cover the widest portion of the effective range of a carbine better than any other single optic. While a tad slower up close than red dot or holographic sight, a good LPVO isnít that far off (and can keep pace pretty well if you actually put the work in to get fast). At distances where long guns are traditionally king the LPVO has a distinct advantage in target acquisitions, and ID at a minimum. With an intelligently designed reticle the shooter gets some other useful tools for improving their ability to make bullets go where theyíre needed. I know a lot of people seem to dislike BDC reticles, but Iíve had very good luck with them at the distances you would normally use something like a 5.56mm carbine at. A red dot doesnít offer that functionality.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    8,703
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by markm View Post
    I'm still struggling to find the need for the LBGTO sight. These fragile, bohemoth things on fighting ARs just don't make sense to me. The Nightforce variant is at least manageable in size, but as someone pointed out, a bright red dot when dialed down would make it faster for me.
    I have to disagree with Firefly that RDS sights are obsolete, but LPVO's do have their place. Right now I've got a Leupold firedot that works as a dot sight close up but no matter how much I practice I just can't get anywhere near the speed I have with a dedicated RDS. I kind of don't expect that to change. I think the nature of the beast is that they just don't work as quick-shot optics. Maybe....maybe...when I get the funds I'll jump into a Trijicon with the triangle illuminated reticle and see if I'm any faster with that. Right now my solution is RDS on pistol AR; other optics on rifle AR's.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Black Hills, South Dakota
    Posts
    2,519
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by titsonritz View Post
    My Kahles 1-6x24i and Surefire M600DF worked great in the low light class I took a couple months ago.

    I don't see much speed disadvantage with my Kahles over my Aimpoints for the majority of my shooting. The one exception I can think of is shooting through barricades while in irregular/unnatural positions, other that you're dealing with additional weight and a larger footprint.
    My last opportunity to shoot with barricades was a PatMac class and if the LPVO was slower than the Aimpoint the results among the students didnít show it. For the rifle challenge the fastest clean practice run was performed by myself with the NF 1-4 (using no illumination by the way, daylight bright is not needed if you can see the reticle), and the fastest clean final and winner was another good shooter running a Vortex Razor 1-6. Any time we had to shoot for any kind of accuracy standards those of us with magnified optics seemed to do better as well.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •