Which red dot will fail first?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Guys, its pretty clear. If the gun is a paper puncher or safe queen then put any scope on it you are happy with. Hell even bubba the hell outta the gun. The point is pretty simply that if the gun will ever be picked up potentially in a defensive situation, is a duty weapon, will be used at classes and trainings, will be run hard, or you want to buy once and want peace of mind, then the cheapo red dots or others are not going to cut it for your intended usage. If your cheap rod dot works for your application, then great. If you are happy with it then great. But lets not fool ourselves into believing that they are all created equal. They are not for reasons I mentioned earlier. Its not that a cheap part will just disintegrate if it is called upon, it is that things fail and they tend to fail at bad times, sometimes when you need them most. If that is a consideration for your application then buying the cheap red dot won't help solve the problem.

For those of you who are saying "why do you need this or that, think about what you are saying please. That rhetoric sounds familiar if you know what I mean. I want it cause its my damn right to have it and it isn't your place, any of you, to tell me otherwise. What's next out of some of you.....Why do you need semi autos for.....blah, blah. All this when Hillary Clinton is going to sign a global UN gun ban soon......
 
Technology- EOTech is only one to offer holographic technology besides bushnell. Bushnell has no armor to protect it from abuse, however. Holographic technology allows complete true parallax-free optics.
Quality control- which cheapo Chinese made red dot has the same quality control as eotech/aimpoint/trijicon/ect? Let me know.
Battery life- which cheapo has anything even near EOTech let alone Aimpoint?
Weight to strength ratio- The good ones are made to be as light as possible while being the strongest available made to withstand abuse (Chinese ones I seen are either too heavy and still fail or are paper light and I can imagine how that is crafted). Which Chinese red dot is made this way?
Craftsmanship- Which Chinese red dot pays attention to the way they are crafted as much as the expensive ones? Or are they just mass produced with little regard to quality?
Which Chinese red dot is battle tested/ field tested and can be said to instill confidence to the user?
Which ones have gone through rigorous testing?
Which one do you know for sure holds zero long-term with abusive recoil?
Those of you who love your cheapo red dots and swear everyone who buys an EOTech/Aimpoint/Trijicon is nuts- How many rounds you got with your amazing scope? Have you dropped /hit/ dinged it? Have you owned/ used for long term the “expensive” ones?
Got waterproof???

There is no doubt that EOTech/ Aimpoint/ Trijicon is expensive. It took me a long time to graduate up to them (I’m not made of money either), but it was important enough to me for my usage and reasoning. I think there is a difference, we all know there is a difference, so lets not get butt-hurt if what you like isn’t as good. Like I say if it works for you then great! No need for misinformation. What’s the problem?
 
Last edited:
Guys, its pretty clear. If the gun is a paper puncher or safe queen then put any scope on it you are happy with.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't even say that. A cheap red-dot that won't hold zero is nothing but frustration on a paper puncher.
 
walter34payton2002 said:
Guys, its pretty clear. If the gun is a paper puncher or safe queen then put any scope on it you are happy with. Hell even bubba the hell outta the gun. The point is pretty simply that if the gun will ever be picked up potentially in a defensive situation, is a duty weapon, will be used at classes and trainings, will be run hard, or you want to buy once and want peace of mind, then the cheapo red dots or others are not going to cut it for your intended usage. If your cheap rod dot works for your application, then great. If you are happy with it then great. But lets not fool ourselves into believing that they are all created equal. They are not for reasons I mentioned earlier. Its not that a cheap part will just disintegrate if it is called upon, it is that things fail and they tend to fail at bad times, sometimes when you need them most. If that is a consideration for your application then buying the cheap red dot won't help solve the problem.

For those of you who are saying "why do you need this or that, think about what you are saying please. That rhetoric sounds familiar if you know what I mean. I want it cause its my damn right to have it and it isn't your place, any of you, to tell me otherwise. What's next out of some of you.....Why do you need semi autos for.....blah, blah. All this when Hillary Clinton is going to sign a global UN gun ban soon......
Click to expand...
Relax Francis. No one said you shouldn't buy any sight/optic you want. I don't even recall one post asking why you bought it. Some people have simply said that you don't HAVE to spend $500 on an EOTech in order to have a reliable sight. If you want to; have a nut. No one gives a shiite. On the same note; some people making blanket statements that because a person DIDN'T buy one of the precious name brands; means their optics/sight is GUARANTEED to break; is also crap.

The one thing we all agree on is: It's your money, do whatever you want. Buy whatever you want. But I still maintain that there's a big difference between magnified optics and non-magnified. Magnified has a lot of additional factors that will affect the quality and effectiveness of the optic. non-magnified have much less concerns. As such; when it comes to non-magnified optics/sights, I only have 2 concerns. Physically be sound; and stay sighted in. Red-dot, open sights, or any non-magnified sight is designed for short range use. If it stays securely on the rifle and stays zero'd, I'm fine with it. And I have excellent experience over the last 30 years with plenty of good sights that I didn't have to pay over $100 for. 2 of the sights, I still have after 20 years. But again; buy whatever the hell you want. No one is stopping you. And not one person here ever questioned you buying what you have. So please; lets keep this civil and keep the emotions out of it. No one is trying to infringe on your "Rights".
 
Optics are not a constitutional right. You have the right to bear arms, not eagle eyes.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. Good point. I suppose we can throw in triggers and stocks too while we're at it. As per current law it is our rights to have such, though. And lets not give anyone any cute ideas. maybe we should delete these last few posts on this thread?
 
Actually, it isn't the constitution/bill of rights that give you rights. It's the declaration of independence that gives you unalienable rights, endowed by our creator, to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. And those rights, extend beyond pretty much anything conceivable. It's the bill of rights, that places LIMITS on the federal government, so that they "Shall not infringe" on your rights. The bill of rights are simply limitations on the federal government, using "EXAMPLES". e.g. speech, religion, guns, assembly, search and seizure, etc... A good example is the "Right" to burn the American flag. It's not in the "Bill of Rights". But it IS part of your RIGHT to LIBERTY. And an EXAMPLE of how the government can not INFRINGE on that right, is how they can't dictate your freedom of expression; which is an exercise of your RIGHT to LIBERTY. Just as not infringing on you possessing and bearing arms; is an exercise of your RIGHT to LIFE and LIBERTY. Etc....

So now that we have our constitution 101 lesson out of the way, under your RIGHT to PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, the government nor anyone else, can INFRINGE on your exercising that right to PURSUING HAPPINESS by you purchasing a scope, car, house, going on vacation, etc... So, indirectly, you are correct Walter. But remember what your "RIGHTS" actually are. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness; which are innate and given to you by our creator. It's just that the government/man can not infringe on your ability to EXERCISE that right. Which in your case, is buying an EOTech optic if that's what you want to do.
 
I'll say this: I have a Bushnell TRS-25 that I run in competition, and I am not gentile with it. It has a couple of nicks and scratches to the metal on it, but it keeps chugging no issues. Its only issue is that its parallax setting is for 50 yards. Meaning much beyond that, aiming with it becomes iffy. An Aimpoint or EOTech has true parallax free aiming reticles. They are on target no matter if its 25 feet or 500 yards. A lot of the less expensive RDS have a parallax setting of 50 or 100 yards.

Battery life on my TRS-25 is also excellent, something on the order of 3,000 hours on medium setting. Since I mounted it and turned it on in August of last year, I had to change the battery only once, and even then I had some more life in that battery any way.

What really attracts me to the Aimpoint line is their extreme battery life - 50,000 hours, as well as them being very tough and sturdy sights. That and the convenience of only having to change batteries twice a decade versus four times a year.

Do you get what you pay for? YES, but its easy to get much less then what you pay for too. A $120 Bushnell TRS-25 you get what you pay for, a $120 NCStar red dot, and that can get iffy.
 
Interesting post. However; there are 2 things that I simply can't go with. Not that I don't agree with it; just that it's irrelevant. 1) We're talking about red-dot sights. A typical red-dot is non-magnification. It's 1x. Which means; it doesn't matter if an aimpoint or eotech has a free aiming reticle out to 500 yards. A red-dot sight generally will not be used for much beyond 100-150 yards. Past that, and you start requiring magnification; which means a scope. Not a red dot. (Sort of like that corvette that can do 150 mph compared to a ford focus. If you only drive in Manhattan, and the speed limit only goes 35-40, then it doesn't matter. 2) Comparing a $120 bushnell to a $120 ncstar is a good example; except you'll be hard pressed to find a $120 ncstar "RED-DOT". Not that it's not possible, but it would be difficult. And if you could, most people wouldn't buy it. The purpose of buying a ncstar, tasco, barska, or some others, would be because "Quality vs Capabilities vs Cost" would have you wanting the less expensive one. But if you're going to pay about the same price for 2 different levels of quality, you'd buy the better quality.

Basically; there are levels of quality and/or capabilities that a person NEEDS; and there are levels of that a person WANTS. Sometimes the WANTS is for potential needs. Sometimes it's just to be able to say they have it. Like the 150 mph corvette in New York City. Definitely no NEED. Just a want. "In the corvette scenario, a want that could never be used".

The want/need factor is definitely up to the individual. No one is arguing. The one thing I notice in these discussions; whether it's optics/sights, or glock vs whatever, or ford focus vs corvette..... One thing ALWAYS seems to be true. NO ONE ever seems to tell the person who WANTS to buy the corvette, EOTech, Glock, etc... that they shouldn't buy it; or that they're wasting their money; etc... It's always the glock owner, corvette owner, EOTech owner, etc... telling others that they shouldn't buy anything less expensive. Almost like they're simply trying to justify or rationalize their expensive purchase. Interesting. I think there's simply some people that don't realize, that even for defense (Because some love to mention IS YOUR LIFE WORTH IT type crap); that even for defense; you don't need $500 optics on your gun. Hell; for defense, you only NEED iron sights basically. Why? Because defensive use is basically 50 feet or less. After that; you'd be hard pressed to convince a judge you were defending yourself. And if you get into the red-dawn "Gun-fight' scenarios; then I won't even entertain those.

So; people should decide what they NEED, what they WANT, research what others are using; then decide for themselves. And there are PLENTY of sights/red-dot types, that are under $100 and quite satisfactory. They're stable, firm, and stay on target. That's all I need. And I have quite a few of them. And I will qualify; because some people refuse to read; that I am specifically speaking of NON-Magnification sights. Magnified scopes are a totally different issue, with different concerns and things to consider.
 
I think you should do some side by side comparisons of some of the cheap sights against the EOTech specifically since it has a smaller dot than most. The aim small miss small adage is very appropriate in that application.
My uses may not be the same as yours but I can assure you that a 1MOA dot from a quality sight will outshoot a 4 or 5 minute dot from a cheap import every time every day.
It's not the matter of cost so much as things that are better usually cost more, at least when buying retail.
 
X-Rap said:
I think you should do some side by side comparisons of some of the cheap sights against the EOTech specifically since it has a smaller dot than most. The aim small miss small adage is very appropriate in that application.
My uses may not be the same as yours but I can assure you that a 1MOA dot from a quality sight will outshoot a 4 or 5 minute dot from a cheap import every time every day.
It's not the matter of cost so much as things that are better usually cost more, at least when buying retail.
Click to expand...
The fact that you bring up "MOA" Minute of Angle, is enough for me to know that in no way do we have any similar needs. Therefor, an EOTech is not something I'm interested in paying for. Especially $400+ for it. My hunting rifles; at 300-400 yards, is a totally different story. And I've said that about scopes too many times. But a non-magnified sight; whether red-dot, holo, or iron sights, is not something I care about MOA. Not even part of my vocabulary. My purpose for such a rifle is punching paper; tin cans; prairie dogs, and possibly people in a defensive environment. And with non-mag sights of whatever type, that means no more than 100-150 yards. Less than 25 yards if we're talking about defensive needs. And 1MOA or 4MOA means absolutely nothing to me.

So again; you are definitely free to go for an aimpoint or EOTech. I think that fantastic. If that's what you want or even need. My thing is for those that think if you don't buy the best that you can afford, then you're compromising and buying inferior equipment. That is simply untrue. Inferior/Superior, is totally subjective to what you want to do with it. And that includes defensive purposes. We aren't using these weapons for military or police use. (At least some of us aren't any longer). I'm not doing belly crawls under barbed wire. I'm not going to be kicking down doors. I don't need such a sight. I need a sight that physically will stay intact and not break; and one that stays sighted and doesn't drift. Do I really care if the red dot is 1MOA? I couldn't care less. And that is what this is all about. If a person WANTS or believes they have a need for a $400+ sight; then by all means, they should go buy it. But don't tell someone who doesn't NEED such a sight, that the EOTech is better and theirs is inferior. A corvette is BETTER than the Focus on the interstate. But if you are only in the city; driving 35-40mph, then the corvette is NOT better. The sights I use are physically dependable and reliable. They don't drift of sight. At 100 yards, without a vise, lead sled, bench rest, etc... I can get an entire 30 round magazine inside a 4"x4" square. That's more than enough. And that's what matters.
 
I'm in the market for a red dot scope for three-gun matches so I'm watching this thread closely. My AR15 has a Leupold Mark 4 1.5-5x scope on it but I learned the hard way that even on 1.5x it's too slow to get on target. The problem is the eye relief and even if I use the "nose to charging handle" technique, it just isn't fast enough. The Leupold is an excellent optic, but not for my intended use.

I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but I'm in the "you get what you pay for camp" so I'm looking at the Aimpoint CompM4S. I'm still in the research phase so if it turns out that I can spend $300 and get an excellent, robust, repeatable and reliable sight, I'm all for it. I'm not overly excited about spending any money on a red dot sight but will happily spend a lot of money on magnified optics such as those from Premier, Zeiss or Leupold.
 
Last edited:
I'm with you 1858. I have had no problem spending $500+ on a zeiss scope for one of my hunting rifles. When I'm taking a shot that is at the 400+/- yard mark at a goat, sheep, or similar; I need to hit exactly. And if I was a competition shooter, scopes would also be important. Even for you, doing 3 gun matches, it sounds like a good halo like an EOTech would be a really good option. And I am in 100% agreement. But that has nothing to do with "You get what you pay for". You're going to be beating your gun and sights up. Most competitions do. The $100 A1optic, Sightmark, or Mueller simply aren't up for that. Personally; I think all three are great and fantastic open reflex type sights. I own all three. But I don't think they'll take the abuse needed for competition matches.

As for your choices, I think the open reflex/holo type sight has quicker acquisition. At least for me it does. I use an A1optic red-dot on one of my AR's, but it's not the quickest acquisition on target. My Mueller is much faster. I lift the barrel up, and I can see the target instantly. But that might just be me.

Anyway; just wanted to say that I think there's a time and place for different optics. And for your needs, something like the EOtech, Aimpoint, trijicon or even leupold would all be good choices. But for the self/home defense and range minor hunting user; there's some very good sub-$100 type sights out there that are just as good for your needs. Again; I always have to restate; I'm speaking of non-magnification sights. Not hunting sights used for 150+ yard shots. Those scopes have totally different set of concerns and issues to deal with quality. Non-magnification simply needs to not drift off after sighting in, and not physically break, loosen, fall off, etc....
But for the marksman, competition shooter, etc... there's definitely some needs and wants for a much sturdier and finer acquisition sight.
 
Very interesting conversation. Another question I have regarding these zero magnification red dot sights is 'are they more accurate at the front of a rail or the back portion of the rail?
 
well, it's been a little more contentious than it need be
(especially given much of that being between folks that "mostly" agree with one another, or so it looks from here)

mostly, never was a whole lot wrong with keeping it in the middle of the road
not dirt cheap, not super pricey

I do have a couple $30 BSAs, just because I wanted to try a red dot on this or that, and really didn't care it it fell apart after 3 shots (although they have not, I do consider that luck, not confidence in quality)

I do use a few Millet SP-1s, 1" tube 3 MOA dot, like 'em for what I do with 'em, cost me <$100 a pop IIRC
no problems, but I don't run 'em on anything with real heavy recoil

I don't own any $500-$1000 glass either, but if I was going on "the hunt of a lifetime", I would... a couple c-notes is as classy glassy as I can put to good use for what I do at 100 yards or less

I don't use dots or glass on anything I own that I would ever anticipate using for SD, either, iron sights are pretty tough and work real well at any range average joe civilian will ever need for SD, IMO

bottom line - it isn't crappola vs wonderful
it's just about what you shoot and how, and how much is on the line, hit or miss
cannot fault anybody for whom no price is too high
cannot fault anybody who just plain has no good reason to throw money at the target

I don't need anymore BSAs, zero interest in Ncstar, have seen them fall apart on others guns
but the mid-priced stuff has always satisfied my limited needs

you do get what you pay for on the dirt cheap crappola, (you get crappola)
but you only get what you pay for on the really high priced spread, if you really do have high priced spread needs
 
christcorp said:
And for your needs, something like the EOtech, Aimpoint, trijicon or even leupold would all be good choices. But for the self/home defense and range minor hunting user; there's some very good sub-$100 type sights out there that are just as good for your needs.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice. So many choices and lots of reading to do.
 
nteresting post. However; there are 2 things that I simply can't go with. Not that I don't agree with it; just that it's irrelevant. 1) We're talking about red-dot sights. A typical red-dot is non-magnification. It's 1x. Which means; it doesn't matter if an aimpoint or eotech has a free aiming reticle out to 500 yards. A red-dot sight generally will not be used for much beyond 100-150 yards. Past that, and you start requiring magnification; which means a scope. Not a red dot. (Sort of like that corvette that can do 150 mph compared to a ford focus. If you only drive in Manhattan, and the speed limit only goes 35-40, then it doesn't matter. 2) Comparing a $120 bushnell to a $120 ncstar is a good example; except you'll be hard pressed to find a $120 ncstar "RED-DOT". Not that it's not possible, but it would be difficult. And if you could, most people wouldn't buy it. The purpose of buying a ncstar, tasco, barska, or some others, would be because "Quality vs Capabilities vs Cost" would have you wanting the less expensive one. But if you're going to pay about the same price for 2 different levels of quality, you'd buy the better quality.

Basically; there are levels of quality and/or capabilities that a person NEEDS; and there are levels of that a person WANTS. Sometimes the WANTS is for potential needs. Sometimes it's just to be able to say they have it. Like the 150 mph corvette in New York City. Definitely no NEED. Just a want. "In the corvette scenario, a want that could never be used".

The want/need factor is definitely up to the individual. No one is arguing. The one thing I notice in these discussions; whether it's optics/sights, or glock vs whatever, or ford focus vs corvette..... One thing ALWAYS seems to be true. NO ONE ever seems to tell the person who WANTS to buy the corvette, EOTech, Glock, etc... that they shouldn't buy it; or that they're wasting their money; etc... It's always the glock owner, corvette owner, EOTech owner, etc... telling others that they shouldn't buy anything less expensive. Almost like they're simply trying to justify or rationalize their expensive purchase. Interesting. I think there's simply some people that don't realize, that even for defense (Because some love to mention IS YOUR LIFE WORTH IT type crap); that even for defense; you don't need $500 optics on your gun. Hell; for defense, you only NEED iron sights basically. Why? Because defensive use is basically 50 feet or less. After that; you'd be hard pressed to convince a judge you were defending yourself. And if you get into the red-dawn "Gun-fight' scenarios; then I won't even entertain those.

So; people should decide what they NEED, what they WANT, research what others are using; then decide for themselves. And there are PLENTY of sights/red-dot types, that are under $100 and quite satisfactory. They're stable, firm, and stay on target. That's all I need. And I have quite a few of them. And I will qualify; because some people refuse to read; that I am specifically speaking of NON-Magnification sights. Magnified scopes are a totally different issue, with different concerns and things to consider.
Click to expand...

Wrong again. I said it depends on the application and needs of the user. I said if you are using it to punch paper then anything you like is fine. I think we are misunderstanding parallax. With the EOTech there is no parallax. That is, if you can see the dot, it is on the target no matter what. Period. Even Aimpoint, although good, cannot claim this because using non-holographic technology relies on making the glass convex in order to limit parallax, but cannot fully accomplish this. EOTech is less battery life, but the tradeoff there is Aimpoint crushes them in that regard. However, no cheapo even comes close. Another thing about holographic technology is that if there is an obstruction on the glass of the EOTech, the reticle will "move" to the clear portion of the glass. This includes a SHATTERED glass, mud, snow, or other obstruction. This is because the image is etched into every part of the glass and because image is projected using holograph. Which cheapo red dot does that? But I guess you don't need that so no one else does too, right? Aimpoint you can throw downrange at a brick wall, pick it up and strap it back on and it held zero. These are just some of the reasons that folks who may use their gun for defense may see this as a benefit.

Secondly, its pretty simple. No one is talking Red Dawn scenarios. Simply, buying one of the first class red dots minimizes the chance of failure- right or wrong? Rhetorical question Francis. That's what its all about. There are other really good ones that don't cost $500. Bushnell holosight comes to mind. Considering they own EOTech and is the same technology minus the armor. Also, again you are oversimplifying things because I suspect you, like always, insist that what works for you should be the rule of thumb. Sorry. The Corvette vs the Focus? Really? The speed is the only difference? Now I understand where you are coming from. I will repeat myself again since you found it necessary to do so. Cheapo red dots are fine if the rifle isn't going to be used for defense, classes/ training, duty, or if you want minimal problems. Cheapo red dots are just not made for that. There are some mid priced ones that you may be fine with. however, they will fall short compared to the first class industry standard ones in more than one category whether it be battery life, parallax, clarity of dot/glass, craftsmanship, ability to hold zero, etc. I choose to take luck out of the equation as much as possible, to quote another poster here.
 
Last edited:
You say it's me who thinks what I want/need is what is what others should have. Yet, I find just the opposite. I believe everyone should make their own decision. And that there are plenty of <$100 that also good for defensive purposes. You're the one who continues to insist that if you're going to use it for defense, classes, work, etc... that is must be something on the line of a $500 EOtech. But you don't see yourself doing that, because you seem to know what other people should buy.
 
I've got a BSA red dot on my Mossberg 835 Ulti-Mag that shoots 3-1/2" 12gauge shells for Turkey Hunting.....I've had it for years...it's never moved point of impact. I also have a True Glo on my AR-15 and that thing also has never moved. I've had them for years. They are both very reliable and very durable so far.
 
Just mounted a $34.95 Barska red dot on my Hi point .45acp carbine and zeroed it in today. How cheapo of a combination is that??
 
Blackrock said:
Just mounted a $34.95 Barska red dot on my Hi point .45acp carbine and zeroed it in today. How cheapo of a combination is that??
Click to expand...
You better be careful there Blackrock. If you ever need it for defensive use at home, that Barska will KNOW that the bad guy is a threat, and the Barska will become afraid and not be able to stay aimed. It will probably turn off out of fear.

Seriously though. I am not naive or ignorant. I know that there are some optics that aren't physically up to the task of handling recoil and any stress. That they'll break or drift off point of aim. But I also know that there are a lot that do quite well. Are some of these less expensive sights tough enough to handle belly crawls across a 100 yard field getting all banged around? Probably not. Then again, I don't plain on using the gun while doing belly crawls. But if a person really is into having fun with carbine classes, crawling around in defensive training classes, and similar; then they have every cause to buy a much sturdier form of sights. I spent too many years in that type of training. However; I did it strictly with iron sights. No red-dot type optics. But for home defense, range use, 100-150 yard prairie dog shooting, etc... I don't need the $500 red-dot/holo type sight. I don't mind replacing a $3 battery a few times a year. I can satisfy my requirements with a decent <$100 sight. But those who are really into the carbine training, tactical rifle training, blackwater type training classes; or because they somehow believe they and their rifle are going to be used in those environments; definitely go out and buy the Aimpoint or EOTech. You probably need it. Hell; buy it simply because you want it. But I'm sure that most people don't have those needs. Buy it simply because you want it is fine. But I think it's wrong to tell people that if they have any intention of using their AR for home defense, then they and their family's life requires them to buy the EOTech or Aimpoint and that they are risking their lives if they buy most of the less expensive brands.
 
And that there are plenty of <$100 that also good for defensive purposes.
Click to expand...

Which ones and why? How do they compare to the industry standard sights? I am assuming you have extensive experience with either EOTech, Aimpoint, Trijicon, or other top of the line "red dot" so as to compare. Tell us why the less than $100 red dots are "just as good as." I always love when people say that. Usually it is guys saying their Olympic Arms is just as good as Colt, Noveske, BCM, etc, then when you explain to them the specs and the first thing they say is "well who needs that." Classic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

FIVETWOSEVEN
  • Locked
Looking for a 3x magnification "budget" Red Dot for my AK 74
Replies
5
Views
1K
FIVETWOSEVEN
FIVETWOSEVEN
S
  • Locked
Red dot sight for AK
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
jbauch357
J
C
  • Locked
arsenal sgl 20 + primary arms red dot range report
Replies
12
Views
942
philpost
P
T
  • Locked
Red Dots and AKs
2
Replies
27
Views
4K
Browning
Browning
W
  • Locked
Red dots for SKS
Replies
3
Views
489
danweasel
D
Back
Top