Red dot sights--I need some educating

[TexasSkyhawk]

I don't like the rear sight on my Mini-14. I don't want to put a scope on it as I don't really do any distance shooting with it, 'cause that's not what it's for.

So, I'm pretty much thinking that a red dot will be the way to go.

Only one problem, and that is that I don't know beans about red dots.

Went to Bass Pro tonight and saw 25mm, 30mm and 42mm red dots. Saw information on packaging and info sheets talking about MOA, which I didn't think would be all that big of a deal with a red dot.

I'm not worried about mounting whichever one I get. It'll be on a ranch model with the Weaver mounts, and I've mounted a number of scopes before. Same thing goes for sighting it in--I've got a nice laser boresight system.

But what is the difference in all the red dot sights, what makes one truly better than another, what are the differences in mm (25, 30, 42--or is that just field of view, same as with optical scopes?), etc.

Here's the necessary info:

Gun--Ruger Mini-14 ranch
Application--plinking, target shooting at 50 meters or less, some varmint hunting. I don't do a lot of shooting with this gun. Don't plan on increasing how much or how often I shoot it.
Budget--In line with the application. Don't need to spend an arm and a leg for the occasional trip to the range or ranch that it will see.

Thanks for your help.

Jeff

 

[MAX100]

I would get one of the Aimpoint ML2 copy sights. They cost about $50 and come with a mount. Best red dot sight in it's price range and even three times more. I have a real Aimpoint and the copy and it is hard to tell them apart. The copy has held up after 3 years and thousands on rounds.

They are made by XDOPTICS in China who makes many scopes for American and foreign scope companies.

XDOPTICS Link shows the Aimpoint copy in their line up. They are a firearms optic and mount manufacture:

http://owenge.en.ec21.com/product_d...ght,Reflex_Sight,Hot_Sale_Red_Dot_Sight_M2000

Aimpoint Copy Link. It is a Airsoft website but the optics and mounts are not toys.The Airsoft crowd buys them because they are low cost.

http://www.airsoftvanguard.com/inde...=en&favorite=AIMPOINT&submit.x=34&submit.y=10


The site is located in Honk Kong China and the prices include the shipping cost. It takes about 5 business days for the time they ship to receive your sight. You pay by PayPal so there is no risk. If you don't like the sight send it back and just put in for a refund with PayPal and they will give it to you no questions asked. They always side with the buyer. You will like this Aimpoint Copy.


GC

 

[Jayb]

This may give you a bit of info.......

http://www.bullseyepistol.com/dotsight.htm

The XX mm is just like standard scopes....... tube/bell diameter.

MOA is referring to the size of the dot. As in group size, a 4 MOA dot for example, would cover 4" at 100 yards, 2" at 50 yards, 1" at 25 yards, and so on. You might not be pleased if the dot prevented you from seeing the target you wanted to shoot at. Dot clarity/sharpness is a concern to me. Some dot sights can be adjusted so bright that the dot shape is distorted. I'm not slamming any dot sight, but most of the time, you get what you pay for.

 

[MAX100]

Not with the Aimpoint ML2 copy sight. You get way more than you pay for. Do some research on the net and read the reviews of the ones who sale them on Ebay. The reviews on them are all good. I own one an they are excellent. The $42 for one is to good to be true but it is true. The mount that comes with it is excellent also. I would go with the one with the copy of the ARMS Throw quick release lever mount for $55. Just the real ARMS mount alone would cost you $130.


GC

 

[Jayb]

Most everyone works for the money they have to spend. I'm not telling anyone where to spend their money. MY opinion is, unless I have no choice, I won't voluntary support the Chinese economy over ours. To each his/her own.

 

[MAX100]

I am not going to get pulled into the China argument. My advice is stay out Walmart and most any other store for that fact. 99% of our apple juice from concentrate comes from China. The steel in the car you are driving. Do I need to make a mile long list. Vote and let the politicians handle the trade agreements. That is about all we can really do.


GC

 

[Blacky]

You get what you pay for.

Tex, I received a SOCOM II for XMAS and I created a similar thread. I looked at Aimpoint, EOTech, Trijicon etc. I'm slightly challenged visually so I decided to go with something with some magnification, the Leupold Mark 4® 1-3x14mm CQ/T. The best price I could find was at Optics Planet.

I found out about 2 hours after I placed my order that they were out of stock. so I wont be getting it for a couple more weeks.

Anyway, its another option you might consider... good luck!

 

[Omnivore]

The dot won't "cover" anything. The dot "subtends". The difference is that you have both eyes open when sighting (or so that is the idea at any rate - some people just cannot help but close that other eye).

Field of view is a largely meaningless term when we're discussing reflex or holographic sights, because you retain your full natural field of view when using them (FOV = about 180 degrees). I invented the terms "Maximum Off-Axis Displacement" (MOAD) and "Effective Viewing area" (EVA) instead. You can read my whole article here. It was designed to address repeated questions that I've gotten from customers over a several year period:
http://www.ultimak.com/UnderstandingE-sights.htm
I wrote it out of pure self-interest. Now instead of spending a bunch of time adressing each question, I just point them to the article.

Basically, any good quality optic will do you fine. The main differences are in ruggedness, available brightness settings, battery life, mounting options and light/color transmission. Some are also easier to adjust than others.

 

[Blacky]

Excellent article Omnivore. The whole Red-Dot concept is a new experience to a lot of old shooters. Sometimes it takes a while to accept new idea's so education is paramount.

EDIT: Hope you don't mind if I incorporate the article into my signature.

 

[Omnivore]

I don't mind at all, Blacky. Thanks.

 

[Robo_Railer]

Omnivore, that article is outstanding. I learned a lot in just a few minutes of reading. Thanks!
Can you offer some insight on parallax error, and if/how that relates to MOAD?

 

[tomh1426]

I got a cheap BSA for my NEOS and ended up exchanging it for a Cabelas Pine Ridge with multi-reticals
Now Im looking for a better one, the Cabelas one isnt that bright and I dont like the multi-redical option plus sometimes it dosent work at all.
I was gunna try this one http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=673097&t=11082005
Isnt Bushnell a decent brand?

 

[Omnivore]

Robo,
You can do this experiment yourself; Look through a mounted, quality reflex sight at a very close object. Say, just in front of the muzzle. Move your eye from side to side or up and down. You will notice the dot's position on the "target" moves exactly as much as your eye. If your MOAD is 10 mm, then the dot has a total "offset" of 20 mm from one far side to the other, or 10 mm maximum "sighting error" (the distance from center to the edge of the viewing area [the radius of the viewing area]).

The dot appears parallel to the sight sxis in a quality reflex sight. Imagine that instead of the thin "laser beam" line of sight that you have with iron sights, or with looking at the crosshair in a scope, you have, say, a 20 or 25 mm diameter "cylinder of sight" anywhere inside of which you may see your dot, depending on eye poisition. There's some minor aiming error, depending on your eye position, but I woudn't call it "paralax".

A holographic sight is a little different animal. As stated in the article, it's more like an aperture sight with a sight radius of 50 yards and an aperture of about an inch and a half. If you do the same close-up test, you see pretty much the same results. However, there may be some paralax, but it would be minor, just as you can have a small paralax issue with your standard aperture sight if you're a bit misaligned behind it.

I'll try some "maximum sighting error" tests next time I'm out and get back on here. I have a couple of heavy-barrel ARs that shoot tight groups. We'll see if we can detect any issues when sighting with the dot on the far edges of the viewing area at 100 yards after zeroing by looking down the center of the tube. For that matter, we can put the rifle in a shooting rest, look through an Aimpoint using a magnifier without touching the rifle, and see how much the dot moves on the target. With a careful setup and a very steady hand, there is a small chance I could take a video through a 20x spotting scope and actually show you the results. I'm not promising that, but I have gotten some nice still photos through the scope.

 

[Robo_Railer]

Excellent; thanks.
As I mentioned in ArmoredMan's thread in another section of THR, I first learned about parallax in regards to analog meters. The old speed radars had a little mirror strip along the whole arc of the needle's movement, so you could be sure you had it lined up on the right number. I think that was one of those places where being off to either side of the actual alignment could cause a problem.

Might that be another reason for co-witnessing the dot (chevron, whatever) with the front sight?

Thanks again. I'll try to PM ArmoredMan and point him in the direction of your Website and the Understanding E-sights page.

 

[Omnivore]

Robo; the only purpose of co witnessing is that you have the option of using your iron sights without removing the reflex sight. You don't use them at the same time (except you can use the irons to adjust your red dot when you first install it-- line up the irons as if aiming at a target, then adjust the red dot to sit right on top the front post. Then you're on-paper, and you finish zeroing by live fire, using only the red dot in the following manner). When using the dot, you look over the top of the iron sights, ignoring the front sight. The dot will then appear to float well above the front post, which, again, you ignore completely while focusing on the target with both eyes.

The aiming error (and I'm going to attempt to prove it on camera this weekend) is at most half the diameter of your rear lens at any distance, or at most 15 mm and that's if you're shooting with the dot barely visible at the extreme edge of the lens (your eye 15 mm off-axis). If anyone can detect the movement of their group by 15 mm at 50 yards or more, shooting with a 1x sight (shooting one group with the dot at one extreme edge of the viewing area, say, moving your eye to the left, and then shooting another group with the dot at the other extreme edge, moving your eye to the right) I'm going to be very impressed with their shooting ability. This is therefore an excercise in pure trivia (but interesting nonetheless).

 

[Brian Dale]

Thanks for the article, Omnivore; now I know what I'm looking at with those things.

I'm guessing that the size, shape and weight of a heads-up style like an EOTech would be suitable for a lever action rifle. Thoughts?

 

[Omnivore]

The EOTech A65 reticle is the best, IMO, and the EOTech sights are a dream for an AR flat top. On other platforms, they can sit a bit high. It comes down to your priorities-- better reticle, but high, or a good reticle with a better cheekweld. I use an EOTech on a .30 M1 carbine with UltiMAK mount and I love it ('course I'm a bit prejudiced) even though I have to use a "chinweld" rather than a cheekweld. The Aimpoints and other tube sights, sit much lower, especially the new Micros. My .30-30 lever rifle has irons only, for now.

 

[Brian Dale]

Thank you.