Many more rifle scope questions.

[Oleg Volk]

I'd like to scope a .223 AR for learing about scope use. My compact ACOG has is sold, so I am going to replace it. The rifle will be of a designated marksman variety, in order to have at least some close-in defensive capability. The furthest I would consider engaging with it would be 300m. I figured out a few more details about the scope I want:

- low fixed power (2x or 3x)
- rangefinder reticle, preferably with stadia lines instead of mil-dots
- reticle illumination, either fiber optic or battery

2x ACOG is on the list, would like to get other sugegstions.

I would consider a zoom optic, but it seems that the ranging reticle would necessarily change thickness depending on the magnification. Am I correct in that assumption?

 

[taliv]

my recommendation would be for you to put a 'regular' scope on it and learn to use it at all ranges available to you. (e.g. figure out stadia or mil-dots or some other ranging system, focus and paralax adjustments, when to adjust power, diddle around in dawn/dusk/low-light conditions, etc)

once satisfied you've learned to use a scope, then put somethign more appropriate on your gun.

i guess what i'm saying is that while a fixed-power acog may be the best thing for your AR between 5 and 300m, it's not going to teach you much about using a scope.

I would consider a zoom optic, but it seems that the ranging reticle would necessarily change thickness depending on the magnification. Am I correct in that assumption?

not necessarily. it depends on which focal plane it's in. i.e. some scopes yes, some scopes no.

 

[Zak Smith]

The furthest I would consider engaging with it would be 300m.

rangefinder reticle, preferably with stadia lines instead of mil-dots

There is no need for ranging in a combat reticle, for 223 out to 300 yards.

Stadia lines OR mildots, you still need to shoot it to determine your holds at different distances. At 300, even the 75-77gr 223 only drops about 13" from a 100 yard zero.

The TA11 ACOG (3.5x) is still my favorite general purpose AR optic. It is effective on small (10" square) plates to 400 yards, and can make hits on 500-600 yard silhouettes if you can dope the wind decently. $1000 include the mount.

The cheaper alternative is the low-power Trijicon Accupoint. The downside is lack of reticle features. About $500-600 including the mount.

A high-dollar alternative is the S&B Short Dot 1-4x, which has a first-focal plane mildot reticle and a very bright (battery illuminated) center dot for CQB stuff. $2200.

The new Elcan Spectre DR is a 1x OR 4x, switchable with a lever. It has basically a TA01 reticle, but with an illuminated center dot (battery). It runs $1500.

There is a difference in my mind between a magnified general purpose optic and a "SPR" optic. The former is designed to rule the mid-range, and do OK at close and far distance. It is designed for "practical" targets.

The latter - the SPR optic - is more optimized for the long and mid-range, which means maybe to 600 with an AR15. It has more magnification (up to 9x or so) and the exteranl knobs to precisely dial elevation for the shot. While you can't really SEE an IPSC head @ 400 with a 3.5x optic, you can easily see and shoot it with a SPR optic. The canonical SPR optic is the Leupold MR/T 3-9 M1 or M3.

 

[taliv]

hey, oleg, if you're wanting to learn to use a scope, midwayusa is selling bushnell 6-24x40mm adjustible objective mil-dot scopes for $110. and a 4-12x40 for only $83.

those may or may not be good deals/cheaper elsewhere, whatever... but that seems like a very affordable way to learn. at that price, they're practically disposable.


btw, it occured to me that with your photography expertise, you'd know quite a bit about optics. maybe you don't do much with telephoto type lenses, since i mostly see closeups on your posters. after you get familiar with scopes, i'd be very interested if you have any tips from the camera world that would benefit rifle scope users.

 

[LAK]

If limiting a .223 to at or inside 300 meters a rangefinder should be un-necessary. Better IMO would be a regular "duplex" style reticle, which is fast at short distances, with the finer center crosshair ideal for the intermediate and longer distances.

I would agree that range estimation is a somewhat tricky - even difficult - issue for many people. But the .223 shoots flat enough that the only real concern is probably to be able to discern the difference between somewhere around 225 meters and your self-imposed limit of 300 meters.

Zeroed at 200 meters, midrange trajectory should be somewhere around an inch and a half. At 300 meters it will have dropped 7 or maybe 8 inches depending on the load/bullet. Even if you need to make a headshot at 300, setting the crosshairs right on the top of the head is going to put it "in there". Underestimate the range a tad, your target is still going to take a hit lower down if exposed.

With the "duplex" reticle, one can use the short sections of fine crosshair to estimate range against objects of apprioximate known size. One simply has to set up or mark some posts, a tree, wall etc with a clearly visible scale and see what the relationship is with the finer section of crosshair at various known distances.

As this is a "learning" scope, I would suggest something like a Weaver K2.5 ($114.00 from Wholesale Hunter for example). This is, by all reports I have read, a fairly good budget scope. On a .223 AR it shouldn't take much of a beating.

The reticle size in a variable "zoom" scope will remain the same or change depending on whether the reticle is located in the first or second focal plane. If it is located in the first focal plane, the reticle size will change according to magnification setting. In the second focal plane it will remain constant and not change regardless of the magnification setting. A call to the manufacturer or checking the technical specification (if in the catalogue or website info) will tell you which it is for each scope.

----------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I would consider a zoom optic, but it seems that the ranging reticle would necessarily change thickness depending on the magnification. Am I correct in that assumption?

Yes, the reticle will appear thicker at higher magnification; but the target will appear bigger as well. It actually works well in 1-4x scopes. At 1x, all you see is the center illuminate dot, the ranging stadia is too fine to make out easily and basically ghosts out. At distances where you need ranging stadia (which in my experience is generally past 300m), you will be at the higher magnification and the stadia will be visible.

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

I agree, ranging a target at 300 yards or less is pointless. Adjust an appropriate zero and just hold. That is still within pointblank range for a number of loads in .223. Ranging becomes an issue at 400 where the drop of the .223 becomes a factor. At that range, you will miss the vitals unless you compensate.

The ACOG is hard to beat. It ranges (for longer shots), has the illumination for day or night, and the right magnification choices.

IOR has some choices too. They have a 3x that illuminates via battery, ranges and does all that stuff. It has a reticle that some people like for precision and for close quarters use. They also have a low power variable. They illuminate via battery for night time use.

There's the 2x Aimpoint. Red dot with double the magnification. Will make 300 yard shots appear 150 yards away. They come in either 1 or 2 moa dots.

The S&B is the bread and butter of the "all purpose" AR optics. It is the closest thing to perfect as of yet. However, it costs more than most AR's ($2200 ouch!)

There's the ACOG with JPoint combo. I've seen a deal that I think was $1200 for this set up. The ACOG would be the crosshair style 4x. With the reddot, you have a night time optic and close quarters combat optic. Remember, at night time, NO optic is really good, especially not at any longer range. You can use the 4x ACOG which range finds from 100-600 during the day giving you precision shooting, and the JPoint ontop for 0-100 close quarters shooting for speed, as well as night time use. You get the best of both worlds.

 

[NMshooter]

The Trijicon Accupoint 1x-4x looks really interesting, but I do not know for sure since I have never handled one.

Three inches of eye relief would be really nice.

Out to 300 a center mass hold should keep them all in a B27 style target with a 100 yard zero. Pick a reticle you can see and aim with easily.

Shooting this weekend proved to me once again that a magnified optic is much better for distance (385 yards in this case) but no magnification is better for up close.

Perhaps the 2x ACOG will prove to be an acceptable compromise. Whatever you do get, could you post pictures of the view through the sight?