Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 73

Thread: Vortex Micro 3x magnifier

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    84
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by maximus83 View Post
    What are your thoughts on the role of a magnifier behind a red dot that has no ballistic holdovers, no reticle? Is it basically to let you get more precise hits within the MPBR of the zeroed rifle?

    I've never run one of these red dot magnifiers, but if trying to choose between this and an LPVO for a new rifle, having a hard time thinking of the incentive to go this route. Maybe weight and cost savings, depending on what LPVO you get? Plus the SLIGHT possible advantage of a true red dot at close range?
    Just to butt in here for fun, let's look at the size of the dot as a quick reference in comparison to the 5.56 BDC used in our JM-1 reticle of the Razor HD Gen II 1-6x

    - Assuming we're using a micro red dot with a 2 MOA dot, if you zeroed your dot at 50 yards at the top of the dot, you're going to be on steel all the way out to 200 yards. Assuming that 2.4 MOA drop on the first has of the JM-1 is solid for your 300 with your ballistics, that means you just hold barely under the bottom of the dot at 300 and, again, you're hitting steel. Even out to 400 yards, that's a 5.6 MOA holdover, so hold a dot and a half-ish over the target and it should be good enough for larger steel silhouettes. Understanding, too, this is all just with 3x in comparison to the Razor HD's 6x on the high end, which helps when its BDC goes way out to 600. Take a dot with a 4 MOA dot, zero the top of that dot at 50 yards and its on out to 200, hold middle of dot at 300, just under bottom of dot at 400 and a little more than two dots over at 500 and you could be ringing steel.

    Any time you have a reticle or literally any consistent feature in front of you, it can be used for measurements and be used for holdovers. Not saying it's better or worse than an LPVO because that's entirely user preference. The LPVO is designed more around the idea of stretching out to those intermediate distances whereas the magnifier is designed to allow you to still maximize your performance close up with the red dot/holographic sight, which is undeniably always going to be the best true 1x experience, while giving you just a slight boost when things stretch out a bit.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    6,824
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I try to shoot NTCH and I know the guarantee is with your red dots, *but* any idea on how this work with a totally stock Aimpoint QRP2 mount and the 2.64" eye relief? Good on placement on the upper with the standard spacer or does it need the forward/cantilever spacer to avoid a too far rear scenario?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    84
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jsbhike View Post
    I try to shoot NTCH and I know the guarantee is with your red dots, *but* any idea on how this work with a totally stock Aimpoint QRP2 mount and the 2.64" eye relief? Good on placement on the upper with the standard spacer or does it need the forward/cantilever spacer to avoid a too far rear scenario?
    Unfortunately no experience with this exact setup so really hard to say. If you've ever used any magnifier behind that dot, though, with that mount, there shouldn't be any reason at all that the Micro 3x wouldn't work. The 2.64 inches of eye relief doesn't really require that you mount it up super far by any means - it just makes it more forgiving for a more comfortable cheek weld. If it can mount with the rear of the optic about even with the back of the charging handle in most cases, you're GTG.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    6,824
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by VortexOptics View Post
    Unfortunately no experience with this exact setup so really hard to say. If you've ever used any magnifier behind that dot, though, with that mount, there shouldn't be any reason at all that the Micro 3x wouldn't work. The 2.64 inches of eye relief doesn't really require that you mount it up super far by any means - it just makes it more forgiving for a more comfortable cheek weld. If it can mount with the rear of the optic about even with the back of the charging handle in most cases, you're GTG.
    I have no doubt it would work with a forward/cantilever spacer. I had a Hensoldt Wetzlar panzerfaust optic in an Aimpoint twist off and it was fine when used with a forward/cantilever spacer, but everything was shoved too far rear with the standard/vertical only spacer.

    Looking at the mini I think it might work with the standard spacer. If so, that could be a real plus to anyone with an all stock PRO, Comp M4, original QRP (Comp M2), or other 30mm dots and mounts that follow that general layout..

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    6,824
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by VortexOptics View Post
    Just to butt in here for fun, let's look at the size of the dot as a quick reference in comparison to the 5.56 BDC used in our JM-1 reticle of the Razor HD Gen II 1-6x

    - Assuming we're using a micro red dot with a 2 MOA dot, if you zeroed your dot at 50 yards at the top of the dot, you're going to be on steel all the way out to 200 yards. Assuming that 2.4 MOA drop on the first has of the JM-1 is solid for your 300 with your ballistics, that means you just hold barely under the bottom of the dot at 300 and, again, you're hitting steel. Even out to 400 yards, that's a 5.6 MOA holdover, so hold a dot and a half-ish over the target and it should be good enough for larger steel silhouettes. Understanding, too, this is all just with 3x in comparison to the Razor HD's 6x on the high end, which helps when its BDC goes way out to 600. Take a dot with a 4 MOA dot, zero the top of that dot at 50 yards and its on out to 200, hold middle of dot at 300, just under bottom of dot at 400 and a little more than two dots over at 500 and you could be ringing steel.

    Any time you have a reticle or literally any consistent feature in front of you, it can be used for measurements and be used for holdovers. Not saying it's better or worse than an LPVO because that's entirely user preference. The LPVO is designed more around the idea of stretching out to those intermediate distances whereas the magnifier is designed to allow you to still maximize your performance close up with the red dot/holographic sight, which is undeniably always going to be the best true 1x experience, while giving you just a slight boost when things stretch out a bit.

    Strelok+ has 1, 2, 3, 4, & 6 moa dot reticle choices that calculate hold overs to the dot bottom. I assume pro version does too, but don't recall seeing any of those offered on the free version.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    6,174
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by maximus83 View Post
    What are your thoughts on the role of a magnifier behind a red dot that has no ballistic holdovers, no reticle? Is it basically to let you get more precise hits within the MPBR of the zeroed rifle?

    I've never run one of these red dot magnifiers, but if trying to choose between this and an LPVO for a new rifle, having a hard time thinking of the incentive to go this route. Maybe weight and cost savings, depending on what LPVO you get? Plus the SLIGHT possible advantage of a true red dot at close range?
    I primarily use them to get better hits out to 300-500, and to get a better zero. They are at their best within MPBR, in comparison to LPVOs. I just Kentucky windage it for my holds, beyond that. Just like using a non-magnified dot.

    Sometimes they simply help you see what you are trying to hit, as in a smaller target, or one with limited contrast with the background. Also, my HD rifles have Aimpoints on them, so I can leave the dot on 24/7. I can slap a 3x on them when I want to shoot a little further. So its an enabler for my existing setups.

    The LPVO has other strengths. Its etched reticle requires no batteries, so in a way, its also always on. But if you want that dot in the center, you need to remember to turn it on and off. The reticles also are more versatile when you get past 300. If you want one optic to rule them all, and you’re ok with the tradeoffs between an etched reticle vs a dot battery life measured in years, then the LPVO is probably a better choice.

    There’s a lot of overlap between red dot + magnifier and LPVO. Imagine a optic/weapon that is optimized for 5-500yards, and another that is optimized for 6-600yards.
    Last edited by 1168; 08-26-19 at 14:40. Reason: Clarity

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,312
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 1168 View Post
    I primarily use them to get better hits out to 300-500, and to get a better zero. They are at their best within MPBR, in comparison to LPVOs. I just Kentucky windage it for my holds, beyond that. Just like using a non-magnified dot.

    Sometimes they simply help you see what you are trying to hit, as in a smaller target, or one with limited contrast with the background. Also, my HD rifles have Aimpoints on them, so I can leave the dot on 24/7. I can slap a 3x on them when I want to shoot a little further. So its an enabler for my existing setups.

    The LPVO has other strengths. Its etched reticle requires no batteries, so in a way, its also always on. But if you want that dot in the center, you need to remember to turn it on and off. The reticles also are more versatile when you get past 300. If you want one optic to rule them all, and you’re ok with the tradeoffs between an etched reticle vs a dot battery life measured in years, then the LPVO is probably a better choice.

    There’s a lot of overlap between red dot + magnifier and LPVO. Imagine a optic/weapon that is optimized for 5-500yards, and another that is optimized for 6-600yards.
    Yes this all fits with kind of what I wondered--basically optimized for closer range fighting but extending range a lot vs a plain red dot. And with the advantage vs LPVO of the plain red dot up close, and possibly quite a bit lighter weight. I mean, the entire combined weight of the Vortez Razor red dot, mount, and this magnifier and mount, is only 12oz and change. Versus say a Razor 1-6 with a typical 7-8 oz QD mount, you are at like 28-29oz. Higher cost, much higher weight.

    The use cases for a magnified red dot also makes me see the case for something like a non-magnified prism sight with a ballistic reticle--would have very similar purpose. Picture something like this PA Cyclops with the etched-glass but also illuminated reticle with holdovers. Super light, easy aiming points giving you hits to say 400-500y. Except think something more reliable/durable for combat/defensive use. I don't know if anything like that really exists...if it did, that would appeal to me in a way. I know Eotech used to have something like that years ago, and Leupold tried prism sights a few times, I don't know if anybody really has a good one though.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    6,824
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by maximus83 View Post
    Yes this all fits with kind of what I wondered--basically optimized for closer range fighting but extending range a lot vs a plain red dot. And with the advantage vs LPVO of the plain red dot up close, and possibly quite a bit lighter weight. I mean, the entire combined weight of the Vortez Razor red dot, mount, and this magnifier and mount, is only 12oz and change. Versus say a Razor 1-6 with a typical 7-8 oz QD mount, you are at like 28-29oz. Higher cost, much higher weight.

    The use cases for a magnified red dot also makes me see the case for something like a non-magnified prism sight with a ballistic reticle--would have very similar purpose. Picture something like this PA Cyclops with the etched-glass but also illuminated reticle with holdovers. Super light, easy aiming points giving you hits to say 400-500y. Except think something more reliable/durable for combat/defensive use. I don't know if anything like that really exists...if it did, that would appeal to me in a way. I know Eotech used to have something like that years ago, and Leupold tried prism sights a few times, I don't know if anybody really has a good one though.
    1.5x acogs are close, but from what I have read the nature of prismatic sights with halfway decent QC (which Primary Arms seems to do) ends up making a very durable product.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,312
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by VortexOptics View Post
    Just to butt in here for fun, let's look at the size of the dot as a quick reference in comparison to the 5.56 BDC used in our JM-1 reticle of the Razor HD Gen II 1-6x

    - Assuming we're using a micro red dot with a 2 MOA dot, if you zeroed your dot at 50 yards at the top of the dot, you're going to be on steel all the way out to 200 yards. Assuming that 2.4 MOA drop on the first has of the JM-1 is solid for your 300 with your ballistics, that means you just hold barely under the bottom of the dot at 300 and, again, you're hitting steel. Even out to 400 yards, that's a 5.6 MOA holdover, so hold a dot and a half-ish over the target and it should be good enough for larger steel silhouettes. Understanding, too, this is all just with 3x in comparison to the Razor HD's 6x on the high end, which helps when its BDC goes way out to 600. Take a dot with a 4 MOA dot, zero the top of that dot at 50 yards and its on out to 200, hold middle of dot at 300, just under bottom of dot at 400 and a little more than two dots over at 500 and you could be ringing steel.

    Any time you have a reticle or literally any consistent feature in front of you, it can be used for measurements and be used for holdovers. Not saying it's better or worse than an LPVO because that's entirely user preference. The LPVO is designed more around the idea of stretching out to those intermediate distances whereas the magnifier is designed to allow you to still maximize your performance close up with the red dot/holographic sight, which is undeniably always going to be the best true 1x experience, while giving you just a slight boost when things stretch out a bit.
    OK, here's a Q for you. I'm interested in trying your 3x micro, because it fits some of the goals that I have for a new rifle I'm building, two of the most critical goals are being able to extend the range of my red dot, and keeping the total weight down. I'm probably going to try the 3x with a rifle that's already wearing an Aimpoint T2, you already indicated that should work.

    Here's the other scenario: Would your 3x potentially work running BEHIND a prism sight such as as the PA cyclops? I honestly don't know yet if I'd run the PA on a serious defensive rifle--some around here say they're g2g, others says no way, not durable enough. But I want to get one just to try a prism sight and the reticle, for fun at least, since I've never had one and interested to see how well I can shoot it at longer range being a LW, unmagnified optic with ballistic holdovers in the reticle.

    They made a comment in their write-up about using a magnifier:

    The PA1X prism scope is not a red dot sight. It is a prism scope, meaning that the reticle is visible regardless of battery power. The etched ACSS Cyclops reticle works more like a typical rifle scope than a red dot. Magnifiers will work with PA1X when placed in the standard configuration behind the PA1X. Special attention will need to be paid to focusing the magnifier on the reticle ensuring it is crisp and clear. This configuration can be used without introducing parallax or point of aim shift. In addition to the configuration described above a typical magnifier can be placed in front of the PA1X prism scope, however it will introduce a large amount of point of aim shift, parallax and overall unreliability of the optical system. It is not recommended to be used in this configuration.
    What do you think about that?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    84
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by maximus83 View Post
    OK, here's a Q for you. I'm interested in trying your 3x micro, because it fits some of the goals that I have for a new rifle I'm building, two of the most critical goals are being able to extend the range of my red dot, and keeping the total weight down. I'm probably going to try the 3x with a rifle that's already wearing an Aimpoint T2, you already indicated that should work.

    Here's the other scenario: Would your 3x potentially work running BEHIND a prism sight such as as the PA cyclops? I honestly don't know yet if I'd run the PA on a serious defensive rifle--some around here say they're g2g, others says no way, not durable enough. But I want to get one just to try a prism sight and the reticle, for fun at least, since I've never had one and interested to see how well I can shoot it at longer range being a LW, unmagnified optic with ballistic holdovers in the reticle.

    They made a comment in their write-up about using a magnifier:



    What do you think about that?
    Ehhhh it's murky water to start recommending or not recommending prism sights with magnifiers behind them, so we'd say something pretty similar to the guys at PA. Generally just not recommended. There will be people out there who do it and claim it works, and maybe it does for them in their particular scenario, but as a general rule of thumb we can't say it's a yes for sure. YMMV

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •