Indecision on Optics


PDA



JPG19
October 11, 2012, 12:02 AM
I'll try and make this quick. I own a 16" Spike's Tactical AR15 w/ a carbine length gas system and am torn between two optics already in my possession. The choices are a Bushnell TRS-25 red dot or a Nikon M-223 1-4x scope. This rifle is NOT my primary home defense weapon (a Glock 19 which I carry daily is), rather it serves as protection should my family and I need to bug out to some land shared with friends (some 400 acres) as well as secondary firepower for HD. I chose the scope because it offered the choice of 1x and I feel fairly comfortable with how quickly I can acquire a target in close quarters with it, while still offering me the ability to reach out and poke somebody further away if needed. That being said, I have a preconceived notion that this rifle is better suited for CQB and I should therefore go with the red dot and flashlight (there's no room to mount the flashlight when the scope is on currently - I have a Magpul hand guard but just didn't like it so I went back to the stock guards). Not to mention the red dot is quite a bit lighter and I do prefer it over crosshairs. What do you guys think? Is a scope useless in the dark? I also have concerns of quality/durability between the two and of the Bushnell's ability to hold a zero if dropped vs the much more expensive and better mounted Nikon. Thanks in advance, all input is welcome and appreciated.

- James

p.s. For the past several months as I have been debating this I have simply been switching between the two, as they are both mounted with quick-detach mounts.

If you enjoyed reading about "Indecision on Optics" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jim243
October 11, 2012, 12:24 AM
Both are good choices, my answer was the TRS-25 which will hold up very well. I have the same issue between scope and red dot. My scope is on a carry handle and I switch between the red dot and scope without loss of zero.

For CQB the red dot will be easier to aquire your target with. Mine rides on my rifle 90% of the time I only switch when I know I will be shooting 100 yards or longer.

Jim

http://i620.photobucket.com/albums/tt284/bigjim_02/SAM_0630.jpg

Okiegunner
October 11, 2012, 01:58 AM
Jim243,

Nice looking rig.

I see from your photo, that you do not utilize a BUIS. Thats fine, to each his own. (and I certainly do not mean this in any sort of demeaning way)

With the (seemingly Hi-mount of your scope) if you did utilize a BUIS system, would it have a 1/3 co-witness? Or possibly less-to none at all?

If you do not use any sort of iron type sights, then this point is moot.

Anyhow, like I said, good looking rig!! Not trying to stir the pot at all. Just asking.

JPG19
October 11, 2012, 06:51 PM
Just got back out from the range today and while I can't hit the bullseye every time with the red dot at 100yds, I can certainly hit a man or animal-sized target with positive effects I believe. I'm going to stick with the red dot and sell the Nikon.

meanmrmustard
October 11, 2012, 07:02 PM
Both are great optics, but for CQB, that TRS is going to shine.

Okiegunner
October 12, 2012, 01:44 AM
I spoke with Jeremy from Primary Arms today. They had been out, but do now, have some more Bushnell TRS-25 instock, $99.95 + mount ($9.99)

However, come their Halloween sale, they will (most likely) offer these + mount, for $79.99

IMO, though, the real deal from these guys is when thy finally get their shipment of new micro-dots with mount in. A very close AIM-Point knock off, for less than 1/2 the price. Should be about $175.00 shipped incld. mount.

If you enjoyed reading about "Indecision on Optics" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!