ar 15 optics
- Thread starter JO JO
- Start date
- Status
While we're in 'intermission', I decided to go ahead and do other people's work.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_124/...____Primary_Arms_Compact_3X_Scope.html&page=1
I specifically selected this review as it has direct input from the manufacturer and has been mentioned by others in one way, shape, form or another.
Highlights include:
Functions after being frozen for at least 2 hours.
Functions after submersion (is waterproof but not advised to be used with diving depths).
Not expected to function after being dropped from a building (If I were in combat and I dropped my weapon from a rooftop, the scope's state would be one of the last of my concerns).
Functions despite recoil.
Keeps zero despite recoil (unsure if remounting was mentioned).
Seemingly approved for use by a Wyoming Sherriff and used by two deputies (though to what capacity is unclear).
200 hour continuous use battery life.
Out of all the reviews of this scope that I have reread again today, the only reoccurring problems that I have read about were:
The entire scope can come loose if not loctited if mounted any other way than the quick detach mount.
The rail attachment screws' size is an oddball one.
The illumination settings above 3 (out of 11) are 'too bright' to use.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_124/...____Primary_Arms_Compact_3X_Scope.html&page=1
I specifically selected this review as it has direct input from the manufacturer and has been mentioned by others in one way, shape, form or another.
Highlights include:
Functions after being frozen for at least 2 hours.
Functions after submersion (is waterproof but not advised to be used with diving depths).
Not expected to function after being dropped from a building (If I were in combat and I dropped my weapon from a rooftop, the scope's state would be one of the last of my concerns).
Functions despite recoil.
Keeps zero despite recoil (unsure if remounting was mentioned).
Seemingly approved for use by a Wyoming Sherriff and used by two deputies (though to what capacity is unclear).
200 hour continuous use battery life.
Out of all the reviews of this scope that I have reread again today, the only reoccurring problems that I have read about were:
The entire scope can come loose if not loctited if mounted any other way than the quick detach mount.
The rail attachment screws' size is an oddball one.
The illumination settings above 3 (out of 11) are 'too bright' to use.
Last edited:
He asked if a red dot sight is really worth it.
PS: I still, personally, object to an optic that needs to be turned on for the illuminated reticle for a home defense/self defense rifle. I would so much rather have 30,000+ hours of battery life than 200 hours, I cannot even begin to explain. An unmagnified, illuminated reticle has simply been proven faster than a magnified non illuminated (if you forget to turn it on, battery dies, etc). I don't see why it's even a good comparison.
In addition to mentioning he sees them as well as scopes mounted on ARs while he's been using iron sights just fine for years as well as a scope on his 700 as part of the same run on sentence question.Warp said:
I understand your point and just am not concerned by it at all as either way I am used to just the etched reticle, a light (weapon mounted or held) or (more importantly and usually) just turning on the reticle illumination as a natural reflexive motion thanks to familiarization.Warp said:
No worries, as there's really no need to. Different strokes for different folks. I really do not like having to use a battery at all. Period. It drives me nuts to know that there is another point of weakness due to dependance by design regardless of the length of time a battery should last IMO. I also do not like the argument that you can always switch out the battery if you are that worried about it, but when that same logic is applied to say the PA 3x compact scope, it's a liability.Warp said:
An etched reticle requires no batteries at all if worse comes to worse. Ever.
Also, the PA 3x compact apparently runs for over 300 hours:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_7_142/905059_Primary_Arms_Compact_3X_Scope.html&page=1
Actually, thanks to the Bindon Aiming Concept, they can be equally as fast and accurate. Though I will admit training wil be that much more important if one is using a magnified optic.Warp said:
...that's because in the case of the Aimpoint changing out the battery, just to be safe, so you aren't worried about it, means changing out the battery once every year or two...while the optic is continuously for that year or two. This is that whole 30,000+ hours vs 200 hours thing.
Or 300 hours. Either way, you cannot even begin to compare 300 hours of battery life with 30,000 hours of battery life. That is why battery life is a liability on the PA device and not on the Aimpoint.
No magnification, such as a basic red dot or holo sight, is still usually quicker and faster than a magnified optic...BAC included. Your brain doesn't have to work to put the two images together when you are using an RDS with absolutely no magnification whatsoever.
And as I said before, I do agree with you on not wanting batteries. Or electronics, even. That's why I have a Trijicon Accupoint on one of my AR's.
And why I would put a Trijicon ACOG on if I wanted a compact 3x scope.
And why I can be talked into an Aimpoint, even though it has a battery and electronics. When the battery lasts 30,000 hours, and the thing is practically bombroof, I can just about pretend as though it doesn't have a battery at all.
Warp said:
Oh, I'm not trying to compare 30000 hours to 300. I'm just comparing changing out a battery with changing out a battery. If it can be easily done for one, if only rarely, it can easily be done for the other, even if more than once a year. However, as mentioned, if worse came to worse, no battery is necessary at all for the etched reticle to begin with.
Warp said:
Which is why I also like the fact the PA 3x compact scope is not only a pretty low magnification, it already has CQB factored into it's etched reticle via the fat outter donut. Between those two factors and training (BAC), it can be as fast. Without training, without a reticle that has CQB very well covered and with higher magnifications, I do completely agree that the red dot sight will be naturally faster with less training if any.
I am also still just not sold on the focus on CQB. While a deadly important scenario, there are many more scenarios than just that one and I prefer to have a scope that can cover more than just that one as well.
I have nothing but respect for ACOGs. Anyone that decides to get and use one is getting a fantastic optic.Warp said:
For me however, when I can also get what I feel is a great performance for a fraction of the cost, now that I have to pay for my own toys, I have no issue with giving the PA 3x compact a shot and have thus far been pleasantly surprised.
I stand by by statement that I would have no reservations about using mine in combat/a life or death situation not because it sounds 'cool' or something, but because I actually would. Those are two of the reasons why I still own and use it.
I did not mention my no longer being in service because it makes me 'cool', I mentioned it because like I said, I will (barring inactive ready reserve recal) never be going back to war and therefore will never get the chance to actually use the scope in combat.
These are reasons why I ask for evidence instead of offering blind faith. I find it utterly disturbing that others seem to find that concept either foreign or menacing.
And It kills me when after having made a simple suggestion for a scope that covers many bases while offering documented reliability (as well as proven reliability to me) at an insanely affordable price, that people would rather instantly try to attack both it and myself while creating scenarios that it may not be utterly optimal in despite none being provided by the OP and browbeating me instead of providing evidence for their claims.
If I had done the same, made my entrance to this thread as others did, I wonder if I would have been banned long ago.
I understand completely, to each their own. I still would rather the low magnification illuminated etched reticle scope for my previously mentioned reasons.Warp said:
I am still glad that you have found optics that work for you and hope that I have not implied that I take issue with your decisions and what works for you.
Last edited by a moderator:
I would like to be able to say that a member suggesting he receives different treatment than others for the same actions is beneath you, Revoliver. Communication 101, as well as elementary military leadership courses such as WLC, clearly instruct building credence by telling your audience why they should listen to your opinion at the beginning. Failure to do so is not the fault of your audience. I've met cooks and personnel types and many others while in uniform. These are important jobs, but a, say, vehicle mechanic in the Army would not necessarily have more of value to say about an optic than Joe Sixpack.
Now, the OP has not returned, and there's a largely off-topic thread waiting. Closing.
Now, the OP has not returned, and there's a largely off-topic thread waiting. Closing.
I asked Mr. Lerner if the warning applied to the PAC3X, or just the RDS. His response:
The failure rate is very low but you don't have the ability to have backup irons unless it is on a carry handle. I still can't in good conscience call it a duty grade optic.
Marshall Lerner
CEO Primary Arms, LLC
John
The failure rate is very low but you don't have the ability to have backup irons unless it is on a carry handle. I still can't in good conscience call it a duty grade optic.
Marshall Lerner
CEO Primary Arms, LLC
John
- Status
