1-4 vs Red Dot? What am I missing?

[BooneGA]

Mini or micro red dot sight. Just flat out works once you figure out a good zero for its desired application and learn hold overs/unders. Plus work has me in gas masks so it works double duty.

-Rick

[Alaskapopo]

Forgive the derail, but why are you using the KX3 supressor with that rifle ?

Its a 13.7 inch barrel with the PIG attached permanently. I like the look and I wanted to reduced the noise I feel should I ever fire this indoors.
Pat

[CageFighter]

the red dot fits my needs better.
no ranges in my area that go past 300yds.
sucks for me!

[DWood]

Since I own both, my statements are not about which is better. For me they fill different roles. My 16" is sporting a S $ B Short Dot 1 X 4 in a Larue SPR-E. My 10.5" is wearing a Comp M4.

I used the 16" with the 1 X 4 in a 3 day Randy Cain carbine class. 6 of my friends attended using Aimpoints and EoTechs. All are quality sights. I found no issues with the 1 X 4 in any of the CQB work and was one of the fastest/accurate shooters. At 100 yards plus, I was much faster droping prone and getting hits and at 200 no one using a 1X could stay close.

I also add that I use a Grip Pod on this rifle, which Randy sneered at and said I should train without it. I convinced him that MY rifle would always have it and I didn't see the need to train without it since I wouldn't be using battle field pick ups. (I have learned to shoot without it; magazine monopod, VG, etc, but for this class I wanted to use the Grip Pod). He just laughed and said go ahead.

At 200, all my class mates could get hits, but nowhere near as fast and accurate as mine. We were all using LMT carbines and quality optics( I schooled them and arranged a group buy for guns and optics).

Part of Randy's class is low light shooting and he has the class drop prone just before the sun goes down, I believe at 75 yards, and sight in on their target. Then, in 5 minute intervals he gives the fire command. In between "fire" he stays silent and has the students stay on target. It is an interesting lesson to stay on target as it gets dark. He has the students get up once they can no longer see the target. I was one of the last to get up because I had the 4X in quality glass. Randy made a point of having my class mates look through the S & B to see quality glass in that application. If my eyes were younger I might have been the last one up.

So, what's my point? I run both, depending on my purpose. What I call my "longer range" rifle has the 1 X 4 but I can still do CQB with it. I feel my S & B is better all around if my goal is CQB to 200+. Pat Rogers is known to run a Short Dot and holds it in high regard. I don't think any would doubt his opinion.

The gun that I would pick in my house is the SBR with the Comp M4. I also have a T-1 which may take its place. The 1X works great and is my choice if I dont want to shoot at 75+.

I only buy top quality, and the S & B is $$$$. If you can afford it, it is a first class choice. My experience with it is nothing but positive, even shooting in the unconventional positions in Randy's class. The 1X RDS are smaller, lighter, and cheaper and may be better for most.

I don't see this as which one is better, but which one is better for my application. As stated, I have both and like them equally depending on my objective. Limited to one choice it would be the Short Dot because I like to shoot it at 200 as well as in close and it just works better for me. By the way, at 1X the reticle almost disappears and it makes a pretty good RDS. For those that argue it is really 1.1, it not an issue in practice and they are just argumentive. At 4X the reticle is very crisp and allows finer aiming.

I can't speak for lower tier 1 X 4s, but I wonder if those who don't care for them would change their minds if they got to run the Schmidt and Bender.

[Alaskapopo]

Since I own both, my statements are not about which is better. For me they fill different roles. My 16" is sporting a S $ B Short Dot 1 X 4 in a Larue SPR-E. My 10.5" is wearing a Comp M4.

I used the 16" with the 1 X 4 in a 3 day Randy Cain carbine class. 6 of my friends attended using Aimpoints and EoTechs. All are quality sights. I found no issues with the 1 X 4 in any of the CQB work and was one of the fastest/accurate shooters. At 100 yards plus, I was much faster droping prone and getting hits and at 200 no one using a 1X could stay close.

I also add that I use a Grip Pod on this rifle, which Randy sneered at and said I should train without it. I convinced him that MY rifle would always have it and I didn't see the need to train without it since I wouldn't be using battle field pick ups. (I have learned to shoot without it; magazine monopod, VG, etc, but for this class I wanted to use the Grip Pod). He just laughed and said go ahead.

At 200, all my class mates could get hits, but nowhere near as fast and accurate as mine. We were all using LMT carbines and quality optics( I schooled them and arranged a group buy for guns and optics).

Part of Randy's class is low light shooting and he has the class drop prone just before the sun goes down, I believe at 75 yards, and sight in on their target. Then, in 5 minute intervals he gives the fire command. In between "fire" he stays silent and has the students stay on target. It is an interesting lesson to stay on target as it gets dark. He has the students get up once they can no longer see the target. I was one of the last to get up because I had the 4X in quality glass. Randy made a point of having my class mates look through the S & B to see quality glass in that application. If my eyes were younger I might have been the last one up.

So, what's my point? I run both, depending on my purpose. What I call my "longer range" rifle has the 1 X 4 but I can still do CQB with it. I feel my S & B is better all around if my goal is CQB to 200+. Pat Rogers is known to run a Short Dot and holds it in high regard. I don't think any would doubt his opinion.

The gun that I would pick in my house is the SBR with the Comp M4. I also have a T-1 which may take its place. The 1X works great and is my choice if I dont want to shoot at 75+.

I only buy top quality, and the S & B is $$$$. If you can afford it, it is a first class choice. My experience with it is nothing but positive, even shooting in the unconventional positions in Randy's class. The 1X RDS are smaller, lighter, and cheaper and may be better for most.

I don't see this as which one is better, but which one is better for my application. As stated, I have both and like them equally depending on my objective. Limited to one choice it would be the Short Dot because I like to shoot it at 200 as well as in close and it just works better for me. By the way, at 1X the reticle almost disappears and it makes a pretty good RDS. For those that argue it is really 1.1, it not an issue in practice and they are just argumentive. At 4X the reticle is very crisp and allows finer aiming.

I can't speak for lower tier 1 X 4s, but I wonder if those who don't care for them would change their minds if they got to run the Schmidt and Bender.

Excellent post. I prefer the Swarovski Z6i BRT 1-6 over the Short Dot but both are great scopes.
Pat

[DWood]

Excellent post. I prefer the Swarovski Z6i BRT 1-6 over the Short Dot but both are great scopes.
Pat

Swaro = quality. Haven't used that scope but I'll take your word. I have the Swaro laser RF. It's expensive but I prefer it over the Leica.

For the doubters, a fellow named Larry Vickers had a little something to do with the Short Dot also.

http://vickerstactical.com/tactical-tips/short-dot/

[DWood]

Good review here.

http://www.schmidtbender.com/images/.../ShortDotq.pdf

And back to the OP, the 1X RDS still has applications.

[Merc8541]

Try to get behind one of each, it will really fall down to personal pref. They both have minor pro's and con's but nothing terrible as long as you buy a quality optic.

[aaron_c]

I'm sure someone has mentioned this, but the biggest two benefits an RDS has over a 1-4x scope...

1. Unlimited eye relief, enough said.
2. RUGGEDNESS. Yeah, there may be some pretty rugged 1-4x's out there, but I've yet to hear anyone claim that one is remotely as tough as a 30mm Aimpoint. Waterproofing (yeah you may not be a Navy Seal, but you still may somehow drop your weapon into any given amount of water), impact/shock resistance, no reticle lens to come loose, and physics tell us that delivering a blow to the top of a 5" long optic is less likely to bend it than doing the same to an 11" optic/scope, for example, all other things being equal.

Weight is a moot point to me. Add a magnifier to an RDS, and you're in the same general weight range.

[Alaskapopo]

I'm sure someone has mentioned this, but the biggest two benefits an RDS has over a 1-4x scope...

1. Unlimited eye relief, enough said.
2. RUGGEDNESS. Yeah, there may be some pretty rugged 1-4x's out there, but I've yet to hear anyone claim that one is remotely as tough as a 30mm Aimpoint. Waterproofing (yeah you may not be a Navy Seal, but you still may somehow drop your weapon into any given amount of water), impact/shock resistance, no reticle lens to come loose, and physics tell us that delivering a blow to the top of a 5" long optic is less likely to bend it than doing the same to an 11" optic/scope, for example, all other things being equal.

Weight is a moot point to me. Add a magnifier to an RDS, and you're in the same general weight range.

Ruggedness. Hmm I don't see many S&B short dots dying. Both a 30mm aimpoint and a 30 mm 1-4 scope are tubes with glass in them. Both are rugged. Show me the tests comparing them in torture tests to show the Aimpoint is tougher. I have see Nightforce Scopes used like hammers in demonstrations and thrown acorss the parking lot on a rifle and it still worked. Even saw one that was shot and still worked with a bullet hole in the tube. Show me an Aimpoint that has been through that.
Pat