New 1.1-8x scope from Premier Reticles with combination red dot/mil dot reticle.

[MCMXI]

As an owner of a Premier Reticles Heritage 3-15x scope with the Gen 2 XR reticle, I was keen to check out the latest offering from Premier Reticles at the SHOT show. They now offer a 1.1-8x24mm with a 34mm tube. The novel thing is the illuminated reticle. It's a red dot from 1.1-3x but is a mil dot reticle from 3-8x ... COOL!! The idea is that the reticle works as a CQB reticle up close and a more precise reticle with ranging options from 3-8x. It's designed for both rings to be situated between the ocular bell and the windage/elevation adjustments (if desired). Another change is the way the windage/elevation turrets are zeroed. My scope has cam levers that lock the adjustments once zeroed, whereas on the new model the turrets pull out to unlock and push down to lock.

This is not a cheap scope particularly since it's marketed more towards the AR platform and there are lots of options out there. If it does truly replace two optics then the price may be less of an issue for some. The size/weight may be an issue for others but it could be outstanding optic on a AR10 or AR15 set up as a "long-range" rifle.

 

[Bill_Rights]

Price, Manufacturer, Rings and the 1.1X vs 1X issue

Thanks for catching this!

So, what IS the MSRP? (Mfr's Sugg Retail Price)

Who is Premier Reticles? Well, really, what is the quality of the mat'ls and build? Will it hold zero? Are the adjuster knobs crisp? Etc.?

As an owner of a 1-4 X 24 with 30mm tube, I know and love this kind of scope. IF this one can really get out to 8X smoothly and cleanly, this is a real benefit. The only comparable item has been the Swarovski Z6 with 1-6 X zoom range.

Note that the tube is bigger, 34mm dia. Physics is physics; you have to give something to get something. What mtg rings are available?

This is as good a place as any (unless we should start another thread) to ask the experts: Is "1.1X" really as good as "1.00000X" for both-eyes-open sighting? Theoretically, there should still be some parallax (do I have the correct term?) in the 1.1X. Or is this all just marketing wording and the 1X units are really not 1X but closer to 1.1X? I.e., are 1X and 1.1X really the same thing mechanically and optically?

 

[ArmedBear]

I certainly like the concept. I think it has real potential for influencing the future of scopes, unless some ugly downside shows itself in real-world use.

The one reason I can see wanting the Trijicon system of a red dot bolted on top of a regular scope is the way an AR is shouldered differently when used as a traditional rifle vs. CQB/room clearing/urban SWAT applications. Having the red dot up so high over the bore doesn't facilitate accurate target shooting, but it makes a carbine with a collapsible stock a bit more versatile, I think.

 

[husbandofaromanian]

I did a little searching and came up with $2,900.00

 

[Walkalong]

Very, very interesting, but if it's 3K, it will have a narrow market.

 

[RobMoore]

I'm not a fan of any of those reticles. They are a little busy for a 1.1x scope

A donut in the middle with a few marks on the bottom and sides for distance and wind holdoffs is all you need. The top line is not necessary.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

And on a related topic.......

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=500178

 

[Bill_Rights]

Romanian Spouse said

I did a little searching and came up with $2,900.00

The Swarovski Z6 is in the $2,000 range, so I guess the pricing of the 1-8X is in line, IF ALL OTHER ASPECTS OF QUALITY ARE IN LINE WITH A SWAROVSKI, which I seriously doubt.

Still waiting on the "quality" credentials of this new (to me) scope manufacturer....

 

[Kernel]

The turret location looks odd. So far forward. Could limit it's proper fit on any number of rifles.

 

[MCMXI]

The turret location looks odd. So far forward. Could limit it's proper fit on any number of rifles.

According to Premier they had to have a long main tube between the ocular bell and the turrets to get the technology to work. Most likely, both rings will be situated on that section of the tube therefore proper eye relief on an AR will be easy to achieve without a cantilevered scope mount such as those from LaRue.

So, what IS the MSRP? (Mfr's Sugg Retail Price)

As husbandofaromanian noted, MSRP will be around $2,900 but bear in mind that I bought my 3-15x for $1,995 NIB so I'd expect this model to sell for a lot less than $3,000. It's still going to be around $2,000 though which I'll admit is a lot to pay for an optic that might sit on an AR.

As for Premier quality and reliability, the quality is outstanding with very, very good glass. I can't say much about reliability yet since I've only had mine for a few months. From what I understand, Nightforce is the gold standard when it comes to longevity and accuracy of the windage/elevation adjustments but their glass isn't as good as Premier or S&B. But for folks shooting F-Class or Benchrest matches and setting world records, amazing glass isn't required. Repeatable, rock solid adjustments are.

Back to quality again. A good friend who I shoot with on a regular basis has a S&B PMII and we've spent quite a bit of time (and ammunition) comparing my PRH to his S&B. He ended up buying the same scope I have for his Knights SR25 and agreed that the PRH for $2,000 is a way better deal than the S&B for $3,000+. The glass is virtually identical under various conditions, the PRH has WAY better features, better turrets, better reticle options, it costs a lot less and it has a lifetime warranty.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

Interesting. I still think I like the looks of the IOR 1.5-8 better. But this optic does appear to have a lot going for it and if you are already familiar with and trust Premiur Reticles, it may be the way to go.

 

[MCMXI]

Regardless of whether or not we'd buy one, the fact that it may be the first combination FFP and SFP scope on the market makes it novel. Of course, that jack-of-all-trades approach may adversely affect reliability. I have Leupold Mark 4 optics on my three ARs and particularly like the 1.5-5x illuminated SPR on my POF carbine so I won't be rushing out to buy one of these. However, I will be buying another 3-15x or possibly the 5-25x at some point. That's how much I like PRH scopes. The 3-15x was chosen by the USMC as their day optic ... not sure if that's good or bad.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

The turret location looks odd.

I'm pretty sure that that is intentional, so that you can mount both rings behind the turret if you like, to get a far-forward mount, or 1 behind and 1 in front (traditional) - your choice. Very good idea actually.

which I seriously doubt.

I would bet all quality aspects are indeed in line with Swaro - no reason to doubt that from a maker like Premier.

I'm just wondering if you are ABLE to use it without batteries when it auto switches to the 'red-dot mode' under 3 power. Does the normal reticle stay visible?

 

[Bill_Rights]

Oh, OK. Wiser heads agree that Premier Reticles Heritage is a top quality maker. I didn't know.

Any comments about the 34mm tube? I am sure that is critical to getting the 8X zoom range technology to work. I think it is great myself as I see no reason to keep the tube small when adjuster knobs, bell housings etc. stick out way more. I have standardized on 30mm tubes, to the limited extent that I can be said to have standardized on anything, being a poor, small-time gun owner....

 

[MTMilitiaman]

The 34mm tube is odd but I don't see it as a show stopper. Premiur probably offers high quality rings for their own optics. Most manufactures do, esp if they use larger tube diameters. Nightforce does for their 30mm tubed NXS series and Leupold has their own rings as well. As does US Optics, S&B, ect. IOR's 35mm tubed optics, such as their aforementioned 1.5-8, come with rings. So I view it as a potential issue, but more than likely, a small one at worst.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

for 2900 dollars it better engage targets while i sleep!

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Now the military will have a suitable scope that doesn't have Bible verses on it, and won't break the tax payers! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA:banghead:

 

[Maverick223]

Bringin' it back, as I missed it the first go around...great information. Thanks, 1858!

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

24mm objective with 8x magnification? That means the exit pupil is going to be pretty damn small. You are going to have exactly one spot on the stock where you are going to be able to see the crosshairs at full magnification. Even at 6x, you won't have a lot of room.

Looks interesting otherwise though... especially with some of the new .308s coming out (assuming this has the eye relief to use on those rifles)

 

[Maverick223]

If it is anything like my PRH (5-25x56mm) eye relief will be more than sufficient. The exit pupil was one of the things that concerned me, along with eye placement that will also make the optics appear less bright even with the excellent glass. Personally I would want at least a 32-40mm objective.

 

[MCMXI]

24mm objective with 8x magnification? That means the exit pupil is going to be pretty damn small.

My 3-15x50mm Premier Reticles Heritage scope has a 3.3mm exit pupil on 15x. The 1.1-8x24mm has a 3mm exit pupil on 8x. I don't see this as being a big problem since I have no trouble with cheek weld and eye alignment with the 3-15x. This is where real-world use doesn't always correlate well to theory. You can read about "typical" pupil diameters under different conditions and for different age groups but who cares. I bet few people with normal eyes would have a problem with a 3mm exit pupil during the day, either in terms of eye position or reduction in light transmission. However, the biggest problem with this scope is the cost. I can buy three Leupold Mark 4 1.5-5x scopes with illuminated Special Purpose Reticles (SPR) for the cost of one PRH 1.1-8x24mm so I don't see myself buying this scope for an AR.

Leupold Mark 4 1.5-5x20mm SPR

 

[Maverick223]

However, the biggest problem with this scope is the cost.

I will definitely agree with that, I can't see putting a optics that cost that much on the type of platform that it was undoubtedly designed for.

 

[MCMXI]

Mav, I'm wondering if this scope might be a good alternative for someone using or considering a 1x, 2x or 3x CQB optic with a magnifier such as a 3x or 4x from EOTech. Zeiss has similar systems and they are pricey since you have to invest in two optics. Personally, I haven't seen an AR set up like that, but I'm sure some members here use such a system.

I also wonder if the 1.1-8x24mm might make a good hunting optic on a bolt action rifle although the 34mm tube and the weight might present a problem.

 

[Maverick223]

Mav, I'm wondering if this scope might be a good alternative for someone using or considering a 1x, 2x or 3x CQB optic with a magnifier such as a 3x or 4x from EOTech.

It might, but again the excessive weight would be a concern. For such an application I would rather have a variable 1-4x/1.5-5x or even a fixed 4x/6x, but I have never been a big fan of red dot style optics. My next optics will likely be for a new 7.62 MSAR or a Kel-Tec RFB, and while it would work fairly well for the RFB, price and weight are big considerations.