Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 160

Thread: I am really struggling with LPVOs

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Neenah,WI
    Posts
    789
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I'll buck the LVPO trend. I have one and have used it for years....But my default optic is a red dot.

    I have no problem engaging long distance. I just can't find a scenario where I would need or want too, and can legally justify it.

    Pat Rogers (miss ya) was and still is correct. We live in a 200 meter world. And I can engage within that limit with a red dot.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    928
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 1168 View Post
    I also have this problem, and tried a couple mounts to remedy it, such as the G ones. I ended up just running the stock longer with a ADM Recon H. Once I got used to that, I’ve been fine, and I don’t really notice a problem anymore.
    I went back through the AR picture thread and it looks like 99% of LPVOs are setup with the ocular lens nearly in-line with the back of the receiver, yet the stocks are only slightly extended a click or two. Does everyone really shoot that way? I can't understand how that works well.

    I have my stock two clicks out and have to use the ADM 3" offset or else I'm way too close to the scope.

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    1,345
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    It looks way more awesome in the photo to reduce the length, even if doing so makes the carbine completely unusable.

    I really don’t understand NTCH’s appeal. It turns a peep into a ghost ring, and doesn’t work at all with a variable optic mounted in a standard position.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    779
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by grizzman View Post
    It looks way more awesome in the photo to reduce the length, even if doing so makes the carbine completely unusable.

    I really don’t understand NTCH’s appeal. It turns a peep into a ghost ring, and doesn’t work at all with a variable optic mounted in a standard position.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Peep sights and ghost ring sights are the same thing. The rear aperture needs to be blurry for it to work. if you're head/eye is too far back you're simply looking through a tiny crisp hole searching for a front post. The rear aperture shouldn't require any thought.

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    82
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    LPVO struggle is real, but it shouldn't be. An LPVO should be looked at as a two-in-one red dot with a variable power magnifier, 1-6, 1-8 max, that's good from 0-600yds. KISS!

    Over-engineering is what I'm seeing in the LPVO market today. FFP tree reticles need to stay on the usual longer-range scopes. Trying to make an LPVO a long-range scope is foolish. I've come to learn that asking anything to be dual purpose makes it not the very best at any one thing. Nothing with an eye-box should be used in CQB. You need something with an eye-box to hit past 600yds effectively.

    To me, the Leupold VX6HD 1-6X24 with firedot duplex fits the dual-purpose curse the best. Shake awake dot, 16oz, 122ft FOV, simple ass reticle. Lose power and you still have visible crosshairs at every magnification. Want to shoot some distance crank the CDS dial.
    KISS

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    6,172
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Gargoyle View Post
    LPVO struggle is real, but it shouldn't be. An LPVO should be looked at as a two-in-one red dot with a variable power magnifier, 1-6, 1-8 max, that's good from 0-600yds. KISS!

    Over-engineering is what I'm seeing in the LPVO market today. FFP tree reticles need to stay on the usual longer-range scopes. Trying to make an LPVO a long-range scope is foolish. I've come to learn that asking anything to be dual purpose makes it not the very best at any one thing. Nothing with an eye-box should be used in CQB. You need something with an eye-box to hit past 600yds effectively.

    To me, the Leupold VX6HD 1-6X24 with firedot duplex fits the dual-purpose curse the best. Shake awake dot, 16oz, 122ft FOV, simple ass reticle. Lose power and you still have visible crosshairs at every magnification. Want to shoot some distance crank the CDS dial.
    That Leupy with CDS is pretty appealing, but once I get past 300, ranging in the reticle is helpful. Especially out at 500 or 600 on a UKD target.
    RLTW

    Former Action Guy
    Disclosure: I am affiliated PRN with a tactical training center, but I speak only for myself. I have no idea what we sell, other than CLP and training. I receive no income from sale of hard goods.

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,439
    Feedback Score
    115 (100%)
    The largest advantage I ever saw with a magnifier or LPVO was observation and positive i.d. You could make an argument on BDC.

    I'll agree with anyone here that a red dot can do work, especially within 200yds, but are you doing the right work, on the right person?

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,415
    Feedback Score
    125 (100%)
    Here is a kind of an interesting optics comparison. https://youtu.be/ID35q_sFu-c
    Last edited by Biggy; 02-03-22 at 08:50.

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    779
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by RMiller View Post
    The largest advantage I ever saw with a magnifier or LPVO was observation and positive i.d. You could make an argument on BDC.

    I'll agree with anyone here that a red dot can do work, especially within 200yds, but are you doing the right work, on the right person?
    Here's another question. Do you need to be doing work on someone at 200 yards? What's more important, shooting the bad guy or not getting shot? Not discrediting P.I.D. but there are other methods and other factors.

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,439
    Feedback Score
    115 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mysteryman View Post
    Here's another question. Do you need to be doing work on someone at 200 yards? What's more important, shooting the bad guy or not getting shot? Not discrediting P.I.D. but there are other methods and other factors.
    Decent point, especially considering any self defense situation. Longest point in my house is 25yds, the property.... 50yds, and it's why I choose a red dot for that arena.

    I've even made good hits out to 600yds with a red dot, I know making hits is not an issue with a red dot.

    It's making the moral decision to pull the trigger and good info input is part of that.

    I can only think of a few occasions I'd grab an LPVO, but I can also understand why someone would choose it on a general purpose type rifle.

Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... 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
  •