Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«162 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Coxswain Balls
Jun 3, 2001

I'm not looking for your validation through this telescope, just planets boobies bullets


College Slice

charliebravo77 posted:

Even though it's the heaviest option, I would lean towards the Burris based on the magnification range, reticle, eye relief and FOV. I have their Fullfield E1 2-7x35mm on my Tikka T1x and it's a great scope for the money so far - I can only imagine that at ~2x the price the scout version would perform well, too.

Just went for it it after doing some final testing to see what kind of range in repositioning I have open to me. I've got the real scope superimposed on this pic so it looks a little off due to the angle, but I marked all the points to be aware of using information in official spec sheets. Thinner rings should give me much more freedom with fine front-to-back adjustments, and I'm really hoping I can go with the lowest rings possible.



Just gonna have to pretend that's a real scope on there until it comes in.



Thanks so much for all your help, everyone!

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

ThinkFear
Sep 14, 2007



Lol, love the mockups. What you are seeing is the relationship between FOV and eye relief. I only have experience with the Burris 2-7 and the Leupold fixed 2.5, so I can't comment on the other two, but I found the extra mag not particularly useful on the Burris and not worth the weight. Glass is pretty comparable between the two, I think the Leupold is slightly brighter and I prefer the reticle, but that's about it. It's also not a rifle I would bother with for 500 yards, so I can't comment on that use case. Normally, I think you really want to look through glass before you buy it, but the plague kinda puts a damper on that. You'll likely be happy with either.

Coxswain Balls
Jun 3, 2001

I'm not looking for your validation through this telescope, just planets boobies bullets


College Slice

The places here do free installation and basic laser boresighting so I'm looking forward to explaining that setup when the time comes to pick up some rings.

Only low ones available here are the plain steel Burris Zee rings for $45 and the aluminum Vortex Viper ones with thumbscrews for $85. Decisions, decisions.

They also have the Nikon A-Series aluminum rings in low for $35 but I've heard they're trash.

Coxswain Balls fucked around with this message at 20:19 on May 11, 2020

Shaocaholica
Oct 29, 2002

Fig. 5E


eBay some TPS rings. I might have some spares too. Do you know what ring height you need? Itís a catch-22 without the scope although there are online calculators but you never know until you have it in hand.

Coxswain Balls
Jun 3, 2001

I'm not looking for your validation through this telescope, just planets boobies bullets


College Slice

Shaocaholica posted:

eBay some TPS rings. I might have some spares too. Do you know what ring height you need? Itís a catch-22 without the scope although there are online calculators but you never know until you have it in hand.

Nothing seems to be coming up for me on eBay when looking up TPS rings, unfortunately. After doing some more digging I can't even find any suppliers in all of Canada.

I'm almost certain that low rings will work, and can probably confirm it if I can get some clarification on schematic measurements. For example, with these Vortex low rings is says the center scope height is 19.81mm; does that mean from the radius from the center to where the ring base touches the rail? I've already made a somewhat accurate schematic diagram of that Burris scope including taper angles so if I can get the same thing with the rings I can confirm with like 99% certainty it'll all work out.

https://vortexoptics.com/vortex-pro...ing_height=1182

Don't let anyone tell you mathematics isn't fun. You can do so much with just a set of calipers.

Shaocaholica
Oct 29, 2002

Fig. 5E


Centerline height means from the mounting surface(rail top) to the virtual center of the scope tube.



e: oh your scout scope is 1"?

Coxswain Balls
Jun 3, 2001

I'm not looking for your validation through this telescope, just planets boobies bullets


College Slice

Shaocaholica posted:

Centerline height means from the mounting surface(rail top) to the virtual center of the scope tube.



e: oh your scout scope is 1"?

Yeah, the only reason I'm using 30mm rings with spacers on the test rig is because it's all I've got on hand after removing the red dots from all of my now-prohibited rifles. Just need to compensate for it in all of my calculations is all.

That diagram will be incredibly helpful for figuring out the rest though, so thanks a lot for that. Time to crack out the caliper again!

Shaocaholica
Oct 29, 2002

Fig. 5E


It's real easy to figure out the distance to the tube OD. You just subtract the radius of the scope tube from that number.

Coxswain Balls
Jun 3, 2001

I'm not looking for your validation through this telescope, just planets boobies bullets


College Slice

Sooooo I hope everyone's ready for more obsessive mathematical insanity.



I kinda sorta made a to-scale diagram of the scope, and managed to get numbers for the rings I've looking at and got some usable numbers from Shaocaholica's tip. Plain old Burris Zee rings in low can get way down to 4.953mm from outer diameter to base height, and the Viper rings get down to 7.112mm. For comparison, my cardboard tube rig is equivalent to 8.3mm outer diameter to base.

It'd be nice to go super low with the Burris, and you can't beat the price, but the objective bell interferes with the scope base for the last ~3mm of the taper so it limits the amount of adaptability.

The Vortex, on the other hand, gives 2mm of clearance for the full objective outer diameter, so I can move it as far back as needed. The diagram shows I might have some trouble pushing it forward at the eyepiece, but that might just be a tolerance error on my part since the specs say the eyepiece diameter is 38mm, while the front is 39mm. Almost double the price as the Burris, but they're aluminum and what says scout rifle more than being a weight weenie?

The Vortex height is just a little lower than my cardboard rig, which I have no problems with in regards to cheek weld so hopefully it all works out. Fingers crossed!

Coxswain Balls fucked around with this message at 03:34 on May 12, 2020

Shaocaholica
Oct 29, 2002

Fig. 5E


Nah itís no biggie. Just cut the base where it interferes with the bell. You donít need it anyway. Might even let you go lower.



Goes without saying you should take the rail off the gun before trying to hacksaw it

Shaocaholica fucked around with this message at 02:45 on May 12, 2020

Coxswain Balls
Jun 3, 2001

I'm not looking for your validation through this telescope, just planets boobies bullets


College Slice

Hell, might as well do it anyway to shave off those grams.

Shaocaholica
Oct 29, 2002

Fig. 5E


Don't cut anything until you test mount the scope and check for eye relief. The horizontal placement of the scope and rings will determine where the cut (if any) should be.

Coxswain Balls
Jun 3, 2001

I'm not looking for your validation through this telescope, just planets boobies bullets


College Slice

Found the Vortex rings from a place in province that had them for much cheaper than anywhere else in the country, so I went with those. Needed to hit a hundred bucks for free shipping so I got a pair of these. Might as well spend a little extra to protect the investment.

Man, I hope it all comes in by the weekend.

jwang
Mar 31, 2013


Looks like Midway USA is finally out of the Trijicon Accupower 1-8x. All that remains are the new Credos. The 1-6x looks decent enough for general usage without the price tag that the 1-8x demands.

Side note: Eotech Vudu is stupidly overpriced when compared to the alternate options available.

not black enough
Oct 14, 2004



Speaking of LPVOs. What's the goto in the 600 dollar price range? Viper pst gen 2 pops up for that price but with them releasing an updated strike eagle series it makes me think that they are going to start updating the reticle on the vipers too.

Cyrano4747
Sep 25, 2006




From a page back but I just watched this and two notes:

1) loving at that scratch. Looks like their qc practices in general need some work.

2) everyone go watch the last 30 seconds of that review. That is some pro tier, master class damning with faint praise. Holy poo poo.

L0cke17
Nov 29, 2013



not black enough posted:

Speaking of LPVOs. What's the goto in the 600 dollar price range? Viper pst gen 2 pops up for that price but with them releasing an updated strike eagle series it makes me think that they are going to start updating the reticle on the vipers too.

What's your use case? 3-400 yards and in a Steiner P4xi is basically the best available glass in that price range. On sale it can be found for sub $400 dollars if you wait around. I don't have a ton of experience with other optics in that price range other than the strike eagles, and the Steiner blows them out of the water in my opinion.

not black enough
Oct 14, 2004



L0cke17 posted:

What's your use case? 3-400 yards and in a Steiner P4xi is basically the best available glass in that price range. On sale it can be found for sub $400 dollars if you wait around. I don't have a ton of experience with other optics in that price range other than the strike eagles, and the Steiner blows them out of the water in my opinion.

Anything in the 1-6 area? 3-400 is realistically the upper end of where I'd shoot out to but I like being able to spot shots a bit better, even at range.

jwang
Mar 31, 2013


Primary Arms has some really good reviews for their LVPOs, which can be had for a very reasonable price for the scope you're buying.

Atticus_1354
Dec 9, 2006

Don't you go near that dog, you understand? Don't go near him, he's just as dangerous dead as alive.


L0cke17 posted:

What's your use case? 3-400 yards and in a Steiner P4xi is basically the best available glass in that price range. On sale it can be found for sub $400 dollars if you wait around. I don't have a ton of experience with other optics in that price range other than the strike eagles, and the Steiner blows them out of the water in my opinion.

Find me one at that price point and I will buy it. Prices on that scope have gone way up in the past year.

NickBlasta
May 16, 2003

Clearly their proficiency at shooting is supernatural, not practical, in origin.


BIG



L0cke17
Nov 29, 2013



Atticus_1354 posted:

Find me one at that price point and I will buy it. Prices on that scope have gone way up in the past year.

Really? Huh. I haven't looked in a long time I guess.

Shaocaholica
Oct 29, 2002

Fig. 5E


XL

Too bad open style red dots are going out of style?

NickBlasta
May 16, 2003

Clearly their proficiency at shooting is supernatural, not practical, in origin.


Shaocaholica posted:

XL

Too bad open style red dots are going out of style?

Ceros_X
Aug 6, 2006

U.S. Marine


Atticus_1354 posted:

Find me one at that price point and I will buy it. Prices on that scope have gone way up in the past year.

I got a used one off Sniper's Hide for $435 shipped in August of 2019. But the P4Xi definitely seems to be rising in price ($799 new with MI QD mount at DSGarms).

Parts Kit
Jun 9, 2006

durr
i have a hole in my head
durr


jwang posted:

Primary Arms has some really good reviews for their LVPOs, which can be had for a very reasonable price for the scope you're buying.
Eh, after trying some Vortex optics out I'm not that impressed with Primary Arms. At the very least the couple of scopes I bought from them were very meh in glass quality.

Granted the Vortex optics come at a higher premium.

not black enough
Oct 14, 2004



I ended up going with the strike Eagle 1-8 with mount from PSA. 370 shipped was tempting and I saw some good reviews. Wish me luck

Ceros_X
Aug 6, 2006

U.S. Marine


Please post your review, most people I know are not happy with the glass quality. Interested to hear your views / see some pictures

Shaocaholica
Oct 29, 2002

Fig. 5E



Just seeing a newer closed type sights like the ACRO and Holosun.





Comedy option:



Liam Acerbus
Sep 17, 2007



The ACRO is almost universally made fun of for its crappy sight picture. Everyone and their grandma is putting open dots on their pistols, so I'm not sure why you'd think they were going anywhere anytime soon.

NickBlasta
May 16, 2003

Clearly their proficiency at shooting is supernatural, not practical, in origin.


It's a dot in a box, the acro in particular is basically just an RMR inside of a mailbox. You lose your big window, field of view and a smaller form factor in exchange for having the box. If the box is of prime utility to you that makes sense, but they're actively worse than an open dot in any other use case.

Android Apocalypse
Apr 28, 2009

The future is
AUTOMATED
and you are
OBSOLETE





Illegal Hen

I thought the box design is coming back in for those micro dots to keep the laser/lens from getting crap in it. Like those new Safariland holsters that have an actual hood for the red dots.

ArmyGroup303
Apr 10, 2004

If this were real life, I would have piloted this helicopter with you still in it.

Android Apocalypse posted:

I thought the box design is coming back in for those micro dots to keep the laser/lens from getting crap in it. Like those new Safariland holsters that have an actual hood for the red dots.

Basically this. I think as red dots get more popular for police duty pistols, we will see more demand for closed-emitter pistol red dots. I know Sig's Romeo2 featured at SHOT 2020 had an attachable enclosure that turned an open emitter into a sealed one. It's not as secure as a truly sealed emitter, but is probably good enough for most water/dust/mud/general crap purposes. Holosun's 509T also looks to be a contender against the Aimpoint ACRO.

L0cke17
Nov 29, 2013



I really like my acro. I enjoy some matches that have a much higher mud and dirt per stage than your typical 3gun or USPSA match and I lost literal minutes in one match cleaning out my DPP and I'd much rather have a mediocre optic window and never have that issue again personally for those kinds of matches.

That said I still have a DPP pistol I run when there isn't a worry of clogging it up with dirt or mud because the bigger window is much faster for something like USPSA.

not black enough
Oct 14, 2004



Ceros_X posted:

Please post your review, most people I know are not happy with the glass quality. Interested to hear your views / see some pictures

I just cancelled my order. I found this review


https://youtu.be/lMhdGygZhbs

And found out that it doesnít have a daylight bright dot. On top of that the redesign didnít improve the glass quality so I went with the viper PST gen II 1-6. The same guy did good review of the viper and convinced me to just spend the money instead of being disappointed with the strike Eagle.


https://www.scopelist.com/Vortex-Vi...e-PST-1607.aspx

I ordered one here. Demo pst 1-6 for 490+tax if anyone else is looking for one. 2 in stock

not black enough fucked around with this message at 14:01 on May 16, 2020

Tyro
Nov 10, 2009


Probably the right call. I have a buddy with a Strike Eagle and I wasn't impressed by it.

SinistralRifleman
Oct 9, 2007


Leupold LCO video coming this week on InRange

Professor Shark
May 22, 2012



Bleak Gremlin

Maybe this would be a better thread for this:

Professor Shark posted:

Shotgun thread seems to get infrequent posts, so I'll try this here instead:

Professor Shark posted:

I'm on the brink of ordering a Vortex Venom [for my Benelli Supernova]. Should I go with the 3MOA or the 6MOA? Eventually I'd like to get a rifle and have the ability to swap this sight, so I'm leaning towards the 3.

Tyro
Nov 10, 2009


I have a 3moa Venom, I've used it on both pistols and carbines. Personally I don't see much benefit of going for the 6 MOA.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

my kinda ape
Sep 15, 2008

Everything's gonna be A-OK


Hair Elf

I have the 6 on a pistol and it seems nice but for a long gun you probably want the 3. The advantage of the 6 is it can be more easily seen when you first start aiming. Not really an issue on a long gun and for rifles especially you want the precision of a smaller dot.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«162 »