Prism sights in 2020

[marsh1]

1x: Yes. Have it, still use it and love it. Fantastic RDS alternative.
2x: I don't see the point, though I've only emulated it with an LPVO @2x, maybe it's better live?
2.5x: See above
3x: I've done it, and it does work pretty well as a do all, but i'm over it.
4x: I don't think anyone other than Trijicon makes one anymore?
5x: I have tried the Burris 536 with piggyback and offset Fastfire 3. It should have worked, but the incredibly tiny eyebox of the 536 kills it for anything other than benchwork.

The Primary Arms Glx 2x has my attention, but yet again, they put horribly dinky reticle in it, I'm reading and seeing mixed claims of brightness, and now they're having cracked base problems because china is being china.

Plenty of feedback on a 2X including people in this thread also a 10 page thread on Arfcom. No issues with reticle size. It is daylight bright. This is different than a red dot. You have a crisp balk reticle that is better in some situations. Base was wrong material used on clamp, we missed it. We have already replaced them for customers. If you buy from our .com you have 90 days to send it back on our dime with no questions asked. ColtSeavers would love to get one in your hands!!

[marsh1]

If you find your 1X Cyclops reticle small push it forward. The eye relief can handle it and that makes reticle appear larger.

[marsh1]

I saw that listed on their site, sounds like they've upgraded the glass. My only problem with a fixed 2x is basically it's not really optimized for anything: it's not enough magnification to really reach out, and not a true 1x for CQ.

Glass was not upgraded. This is our all new mid tier line called GLx. New design from the ground up. IMHO 1.5-2X is perfect for a home defense carbine. Based on the popularity of the new 2X a lot of other people agree.

[Disciple]

IMHO 1.5-2X is perfect for a home defense carbine. Based on the popularity of the new 2X a lot of other people agree.

How is this generally utilized? Both eye open "Bindon Aiming Concept" or focus through the tube taking advantage of the relatively wide FoV at 2X?

[maximus83]

Glass was not upgraded. This is our all new mid tier line called GLx. New design from the ground up. IMHO 1.5-2X is perfect for a home defense carbine. Based on the popularity of the new 2X a lot of other people agree.

Home defense carbines don't need magnification--they need a true 1x--which this sight doesn't give you.

Also, another made-in-China optic. Pass....

[marsh1]

How is this generally utilized? Both eye open "Bindon Aiming Concept" or focus through the tube taking advantage of the relatively wide FoV at 2X?

I shoot both eyes open. The brain will quickly adjust so you still have situational awareness using both eyes but can easily take shot at very short distance if needed.

[marsh1]

Home defense carbines don't need magnification--they need a true 1x--which this sight doesn't give you.

Also, another made-in-China optic. Pass....

It is a prism scope thread so I will qualify my statement by saying home property defense. We know that is what many will be using them for. It is not an off the shelf design. Our design new from the ground up but yes made in China. With the 20%+ current import duties and political climate everyone is exploring alternatives but we have been using this OEM for 10+ years and they produce a quality product to our specs. That said we have the same ACSS reticle in the TA44 1.5X Acog.

[maximus83]

It is a prism scope thread so I will qualify my statement by saying home property defense. We know that is what many will be using them for.

Fair enough, good clarification.

[maximus83]

No issues with reticle size. It is daylight bright. This is different than a red dot. You have a crisp balk reticle that is better in some situations.

I agree with this completely. The reticle size on the P.A. prism optics is a canard. You hear a few folks repeat it, honestly don't get why folks say this, it's not my experience of these reticles. I still have the 1x Cyclops prism sight, it's the only Chinese-made optic I still have. And though I wouldn't buy it today because it was made in China, in spite of that it's an outstanding optic and reticle. I'd put it up against any other 1x optic I've had for precision, getting quickly on target, and a robust design that has been torture tested. Including my Aimpoint T1 and T2.

What people forget about the 1x reticle is that it has the large horseshoe for close range shooting, I'm not sure how many MOA wide that thing is--even the manual doesn't specify the subtensions on the horseshoe (Marshall, do you know?). But even with my aging eyes and astigmatism, it's easy to use that at close range and it's daylight bright. Just shot it today in bright sunlight, had to set in on 11 to get full brightness, but it was fine. The little chevron aiming point in the reticle *is* tiny, but it's supposed to be, that is your precision aiming point you only use when you're setting up on a target. I like having the option to use this because it obscures less of the target than almost any red dot does, and when I compare it to my Aimpoints, which are never perfectly round dots, the Cyclops chevron is crystal clear.

If P.A. would just take this excellent sight design, and get it made by one of our allies or any friendly democratic country, I'd happily pay an increased price on this scope if necessary, and would probably buy another 1 or 2 of them. Going back to the point of this thread, I wish that more prism sights would be made, I hope that other makers follow P.A.'s lead and keep designing these, they're far superior to red dot optics for clarity, accuracy, and plus there's the simple fact that with a glass-etched reticle, you have a built-in backup for dead batteries.

[marsh1]

I agree with this completely. The reticle size on the P.A. prism optics is a canard. You hear a few folks repeat it, honestly don't get why folks say this, it's not my experience of these reticles. I still have the 1x Cyclops prism sight, it's the only Chinese-made optic I still have. And though I wouldn't buy it today because it was made in China, in spite of that it's an outstanding optic and reticle. I'd put it up against any other 1x optic I've had for precision, getting quickly on target, and a robust design that has been torture tested. Including my Aimpoint T1 and T2.

What people forget about the 1x reticle is that it has the large horseshoe for close range shooting, I'm not sure how many MOA wide that thing is--even the manual doesn't specify the subtensions on the horseshoe (Marshall, do you know?). But even with my aging eyes and astigmatism, it's easy to use that at close range and it's daylight bright. Just shot it today in bright sunlight, had to set in on 11 to get full brightness, but it was fine. The little chevron aiming point in the reticle *is* tiny, but it's supposed to be, that is your precision aiming point you only use when you're setting up on a target. I like having the option to use this because it obscures less of the target than almost any red dot does, and when I compare it to my Aimpoints, which are never perfectly round dots, the Cyclops chevron is crystal clear.

If P.A. would just take this excellent sight design, and get it made by one of our allies or any friendly democratic country, I'd happily pay an increased price on this scope if necessary, and would probably buy another 1 or 2 of them. Going back to the point of this thread, I wish that more prism sights would be made, I hope that other makers follow P.A.'s lead and keep designing these, they're far superior to red dot optics for clarity, accuracy, and plus there's the simple fact that with a glass-etched reticle, you have a built-in backup for dead batteries.

My comment about no issues with size was referring to the new 2X. For some the 1X with Cyclops reticle does appear small. That is why I posted above that the easy fix is to run it more forward than is 100% ideal for eye relief. Makes it appear bigger without impacting effectiveness. To actually make it bigger you would change the zero point which has been discussed. I will look up the MOA measurement when I get back on Tuesday