What's wrong with a $30 red-dot sight?

[LiquidTension]

I'd never put a cheap optic on a hard use gun but spending $30 on a knock-off just to see if you like that style of optics makes perfect sense if you don't have a buddy that will let you play with one.

 

[joeponds]

Thanks for this info, I might take a tumble.

 

[joeponds]

444
Agree 1000% been down that road a few times.

 

[ljnowell]

It depends on what you are going to do with it. I shoot in a centerfire 25yd bullseye league. Last season I used a 30 dollar barska red dot. It worked great all season. Changed battery once, as a preventative issue, not because it was dead. I just didnt want it to die on the line in competition. At the end of the season my wife shot three cylinders of 357mag with it and it died.

This season I am using a 40 dollar TruGlo on the same revolver. No real worries, it works great, just wont use magnum loads with it. The 148gr wadcutter loads are perfectly fine with it.

You just have to know the limitations of the dot and dont exceed it.

 

[daehawc]

As others have said the big difference is durability, battery life, and repeatability.

Obviously, the top of the heap tends to be the aimpoint brand designed and tested in warfare with ridiculous battery life.

I personally have owned a couple of the vortex brand optics. While not as overbuilt or long battery life of the aimpoints, I think they offer excellent durability and repeatability for the money. I'd use cheaper red dots on guns only intended for plinking or fun. If I need to hunt or provide defense I'm comfortable with the Vortex until I can afford an aimpoint. I just keep a couple extra batteries with me.