Considering Fixed Power vs Variable 1-6 Scope

[Click Boom]

I want one of the prism scopes.

[PrimaryArms]

Considering Fixed Power vs Variable 1-6 Scope

Click boom check these out.

http://youtu.be/S0N0Fs0ov1w

There is a 5x coming.

http://youtu.be/LRfwPazE8Kw

-Dimitri

[JMP]

If you're complaining about the ACSS reticle, then the 1-6x PA scope simply isn't for you. Refer to my first post for other 1-6x options. Just keep in mind the price difference

That's a good point. Overall, I would STRONGLY caution folks to try out different optics before buying them. You cannot see the clarity or feel the operation over the internet. If one has not used a 1-6x optic, I'd recommend they look through it. To be honest, I am not a big fan of what any of them offer yet. The problem is that the 6x does not really provide a great picture relative to 6x on a full size scope; it's just the configuration. I cannot see nearly as well at 6x compared to the same manufacturer's full size scope at 6x.

Thus, for more magnification, some may actually be able to see a bit better with a fixed 4x sight like the Hensoldts or ACOGs. Of course, you lose that nice ability to go to 1x, but there are ways to compensate for this. 4x isn't overpowering in these optics where you can still shoot well up close. It's just something to think about. As far as across other brands, I'd favor the Schmidt in this type of optic if money isn't a limiting factor. For my eyes, personally, the Schmidts really resolve well for short to intermediate distances. Of course, the 1.1-8s cost as much as their full size scopes, so it becomes a bit impractical as it is of much more limited use. But, this is demonstrative of how difficult it is to make one of these 1-x scopes. In the end, you just aren't going to get a lot of glass for the money with any of these. I think they will improve over time.

(Target size X formula/mil=R)
Because people don't march in straight lines with a range over their head is why the ACSS was created in the first place. In live situations people run take cover and end up in every angle. Wind is always there.
How do you range targets with your FFP?
-Dimitri

Let's see,
at
100m, 1 Mil is 10cm
200m, 1 Mil is 20cm
300m, 1 Mil is 30cm
and so on
at 1km, 1 Mil is 1 meter, etc. etc.
These clean base 10 measurements really make range estimations quite simple.
If you know your rifle and scope, it's really not hard to be able to quickly adapt to hitting very large torso sized targets. This is why most folks that shoot accurately favor a simple reticle with fine, crisp lines. After a certain point, there is no substitute for a laser range finder, which can also provide the angle of inclination. The problem with the BDC reticles and wind marks is that they are only reliable up to a certain point. In reality, wind may be moving in different directions. This is where a nice clear field of view is of big help as you need to quickly use discretion based on your observation of the environment and the convection currents that your glass picks up. So, at distances where the BDC reticles may be of help, they are not that far. Beyond that, there are many environmental factors beyond wind that will cause misses.

Practice, know your rifle and scope, and at the point you are proficient, you'll find the noisy reticles to be more of a hindrance than a help.

[postal]

(Target size X formula/mil=R)
Because people don't march in straight lines with a range over their head is why the ACSS was created in the first place. In live situations people run take cover and end up in every angle. Wind is always there.
How do you range targets with your FFP?


-Dimitri

Why is your 'ranging reticle' designed around a 5'-10" STANDING person.......

[MongooseV8]

I like the reticle but question the usefulness of the rangefinder. It's based on 5'10" person, however there are never any persons downrange when I shoot. Same for the wind markings.

Then you probably dont see much use for a mildot reticle. I shoot mostly steel and tiny fury rodents, and have found a good mildot reticle to be invaluable. You can use any standard height object. Fence post, license plate, cow, squirrel, crow, etc.

[PrimaryArms]

Why is your 'ranging reticle' designed around a 5'-10" STANDING person.......

Because its for a fighting rifle.

-Dimitri

[PrimaryArms]

Considering Fixed Power vs Variable 1-6 Scope

That's a good point. Overall, I would STRONGLY caution folks to try out different optics before buying them. You cannot see the clarity or feel the operation over the internet. If one has not used a 1-6x optic, I'd recommend they look through it. To be honest, I am not a big fan of what any of them offer yet. The problem is that the 6x does not really provide a great picture relative to 6x on a full size scope; it's just the configuration. I cannot see nearly as well at 6x compared to the same manufacturer's full size scope at 6x.



Thus, for more magnification, some may actually be able to see a bit better with a fixed 4x sight like the Hensoldts or ACOGs. Of course, you lose that nice ability to go to 1x, but there are ways to compensate for this. 4x isn't overpowering in these optics where you can still shoot well up close. It's just something to think about. As far as across other brands, I'd favor the Schmidt in this type of optic if money isn't a limiting factor. For my eyes, personally, the Schmidts really resolve well for short to intermediate distances. Of course, the 1.1-8s cost as much as their full size scopes, so it becomes a bit impractical as it is of much more limited use. But, this is demonstrative of how difficult it is to make one of these 1-x scopes. In the end, you just aren't going to get a lot of glass for the money with any of these. I think they will improve over time.





Let's see,

at

100m, 1 Mil is 10cm

200m, 1 Mil is 20cm

300m, 1 Mil is 30cm

and so on

at 1km, 1 Mil is 1 meter, etc. etc.

These clean base 10 measurements really make range estimations quite simple.

If you know your rifle and scope, it's really not hard to be able to quickly adapt to hitting very large torso sized targets. This is why most folks that shoot accurately favor a simple reticle with fine, crisp lines. After a certain point, there is no substitute for a laser range finder, which can also provide the angle of inclination. The problem with the BDC reticles and wind marks is that they are only reliable up to a certain point. In reality, wind may be moving in different directions. This is where a nice clear field of view is of big help as you need to quickly use discretion based on your observation of the environment and the convection currents that your glass picks up. So, at distances where the BDC reticles may be of help, they are not that far. Beyond that, there are many environmental factors beyond wind that will cause misses.



Practice, know your rifle and scope, and at the point you are proficient, you'll find the noisy reticles to be more of a hindrance than a help.

What your talking about is normally a 10x or variable optic with mils you would never see that on an M4 what you do see is 4x acogs with a premiled system. Your getting precision shooting and a battle optic mixed up and that's fine but bashing something you don't understand.






-Dimitri

[PrimaryArms]

Then you probably dont see much use for a mildot reticle. I shoot mostly steel and tiny fury rodents, and have found a good mildot reticle to be invaluable. You can use any standard height object. Fence post, license plate, cow, squirrel, crow, etc.

How do I explain this what your looking at is a battle reticle its in a 4x its made for a fighting rifle. The mil system is made for precision shooting and is a much higher X its like comparing a Jeep to a Ferrari they serve different purposes. I designed a mil reticle that would blow your socks off! Its faster more accurate and able to range estimate far more accurate then anything out. It will be out later this year.

-Dimitri

[postal]

Because its for a fighting rifle.

-Dimitri

But you just admitted people run and hide and duck for cover every which angle in a fight......

So it's an honest question... why is the ranging based on STANDING when everyone is hiding for cover?

Our mil knows what they're doing- *they* know what they're talking about... I wouldnt concede that you do.

Just because you have a picture of men in uniform on the range, doesnt mean they're using your products. Or want to.

All the Marine Snipers/Instructors I know, and the Army snipers I know- along with the better LEA depts ALL know and understand how mils work... And find it useful and intuitive with training. That thing you're so proud of might be tolerable for a CQB to 400+ rifle... but the snipers I know and shoot with would likely prefer a simple mil based reticle since they know how to use it for distance.

[PrimaryArms]

Considering Fixed Power vs Variable 1-6 Scope

But you just admitted people run and hide and duck for cover every which way in a fight......

So it's an honest question... why is the ranging based on STANDING when everyone is hiding for cover?

Our mil knows what they're doing *they* know what they're talking about... I wouldnt concede that you do.

If someone is prone the center mass portion is what you use like an Acog and also has leads set to 8.6 avg mover speed. Its our military feedback that created the ACSS. This is made for an M4 not a M40-24

[PrimaryArms]

Considering Fixed Power vs Variable 1-6 Scope

But you just admitted people run and hide and duck for cover every which angle in a fight......

So it's an honest question... why is the ranging based on STANDING when everyone is hiding for cover?

Our mil knows what they're doing- *they* know what they're talking about... I wouldnt concede that you do.

Just because you have a picture of men in uniform on the range, doesnt mean they're using your products. Or want to.

All the Marine Snipers/Instructors I know, and the Army snipers I know- along with the better LEA depts ALL know and understand how mils work... And find it useful and intuitive with training. That thing you're so proud of might be tolerable for a CQB to 400+ rifle... but the snipers I know and shoot with would likely prefer a simple mil based reticle since they know how to use it for distance.

FYI Acogs 4x are standard issue they are not a precision optic. Look spotter has a 4x Acog and Sniper a high X scope. The ACSS is an advanced version of the standard Acog reticle not made to replace the mil reticle or for precision shooting.



-Dimitri

[MongooseV8]

How do I explain this what your looking at is a battle reticle its in a 4x its made for a fighting rifle. The mil system is made for precision shooting and is a much higher X its like comparing a Jeep to a Ferrari they serve different purposes. I designed a mil reticle that would blow your socks off! Its faster more accurate and able to range estimate far more accurate then anything out. It will be out later this year.

-Dimitri

My comment wasnt directed at you.

[PrimaryArms]

My comment wasnt directed at you.

Sorry I miss read it.

-Dimitri

[JMP]

What your talking about is normally a 10x or variable optic with mils you would never see that on an M4 what you do see is 4x acogs with a premiled system. Your getting precision shooting and a battle optic mixed up and that's fine but bashing something you don't understand.

I currently have an ACOG, red dot, 1-6x, and irons mounted on rifles that I use. Of course, if I happen to hit something it is out of pure luck because it's obvious to you that I have no understanding of optics or marksmanship.

In all honesty, part of the problem is that I cannot fairly assess the efficacy of the ACSS because it's currently only used on glass I cannot see well through. It's a busy reticle, so my lack of appreciation may stem from the fact that it's coupled with hazy glass. When you get it inside in an ACOG, it may be more impressive, and I'll give it new consideration. Obviously, you take pride in your design, and I recognize that you are at a severe disadvantage having it only be seen on an optic with hardware that is below the standard of what folks accustomed to higher quality optics are willing to accept. I really hate to be a glass snob, but I am sure you can understand that perspective as you are in the optics business; therefore, I am sure you have had the opportunity to use a lot of better equipment and can see the gap that needs to be filled.

[postal]

If someone is prone the center mass portion is what you use like an Acog and also has leads set to 8.6 avg mover speed. Its our military feedback that created the ACSS. This is made for an M4 not a M40-24

Now I'm really curious.....

Why did you settle on 8.6 mover?

My charts- based on *MY* preference is 5mph wind, and 5 mph mover.

At 5, it's easy to cut in half for 2.5 mph- add to that for a 7.5, or double for 10. etc....

Easily set windage correction from 2.5-15 mph, and mover speeds from walking, jogging, running, sprinting... all based on simple 5 mph chart.

This is what I use and what I know based on my own experience. So why did you pick 8.6 for a mover? A fast walk/slow jog?