New Vortex scope-1-6x24 Strike Eagle

[rob_s]

My main complaint about the Primary Arms is that the entire ranging reticule lights up, with the tree hanging down from the way too far for my liking. This Vortex seems to have cured that, somewhat.

What I would prefer is that just the circle and dot light up on the Primary Arms version.

[rob_s]

Would this be a better option that the Bushnell 1-4x 24mm Throw Down PCL?

My complaint about almost all of the 1-4x optics on the market is that they don't offer anything over the 1-6x. If the 1-4x at least weighed less, or cost significantly less, or had the reticule I want, I might go with one, but right now all the 1-4x weigh just as much as the 1-6x so I'd rather have the extra 2x just in case.

[gatordev]

Almost no one is doing a FFP in anything less than a 1-8x or 10x unfortunately. Even then on a 1-6 when I see most guys running them even in the Razor HDs and the S&Bs they're on max magnification anyways. The reason a lot of glass companies are going with BDCs in even the cheaper brands are because most people buying them want it because they think it's cool when in reality 9 out of 10 will never shoot them farther than 100-200yds lol.

Yeah, I hear you. Just seems silly when you have a variable optic. I know I'm preaching to the choir. One reason why I've been eying the SWFA 1-4 and 1-6 models is because they have a standard mil reticule (so I can build my own drops on any rifle/caliber) and because it's FFP, which makes the variable-ness useful. But as rob_s has pointed out, they're all very heavy.

[alamo5000]

This optic looks interesting.

I'm tempted to buy one to try it out. Anyone find a good price on these?

The cheapest I've seen was like $200 to the door. The going price is between $200-225

[Ordnance]

My main complaint about the Primary Arms is that the entire ranging reticule lights up, with the tree hanging down from the way too far for my liking. This Vortex seems to have cured that, somewhat.

What I would prefer is that just the circle and dot light up on the Primary Arms version.

That only makes sense if you want to use it as basically a 6x magnified red dot. The reason you need the entire tree lit on a reticle is for holdovers against darker foregrounds or at night which is what illuminated reticles are intended to be used for. Just lighting a dot and circle would make it difficult to see your marks at distance unless the foreground is a stark contrast.

[Ordnance]

Yeah, I hear you. Just seems silly when you have a variable optic. I know I'm preaching to the choir. One reason why I've been eying the SWFA 1-4 and 1-6 models is because they have a standard mil reticule (so I can build my own drops on any rifle/caliber) and because it's FFP, which makes the variable-ness useful. But as rob_s has pointed out, they're all very heavy.

I don't like BDCs because I think they're a joke unless you're shooting the exact load, in the exact conditions, with the exact same platform it was developed for. You're definitely on the right track developing your own dope and using the reticle as such. As for heaviness I'll say the same thing to you that I say to everyone to be fair... Go work out, lol! The better glass is always going to be on the heavier side, but with it comes all the advantages. I also like a heavier rifle if I'm going to be doing more precision distance shooting. The weight reduces recoil which improves tracking, and it helps create more stability for positional shooting.

[JHoward]

This optic looks interesting.

I'm tempted to buy one to try it out. Anyone find a good price on these?

Palmetto State Armory has them for $200.

http://palmettostatearmory.com/index...-ar91424i.html

[rob_s]

As for heaviness I'll say the same thing to you that I say to everyone to be fair... Go work out, lol!

and I'll say the same thing to you that I say to everyone that spouts that nonsense...

Heavier is heavier! nobody in their right mind is choosing a heavier item over a lighter one when the lighter one works just as well. No matter the strength of the person, you can carry X weight for Y time, and as X increases, Y decreases. That's just a plain fact. More weight leads to quicker fatigue whether you're Lou Ferigno or Ed Grimley.

[rob_s]

That only makes sense if you want to use it as basically a 6x magnified red dot. The reason you need the entire tree lit on a reticle is for holdovers against darker foregrounds or at night which is what illuminated reticles are intended to be used for. Just lighting a dot and circle would make it difficult to see your marks at distance unless the foreground is a stark contrast.

Not necessarily.

There are plenty of optics, even from higher-end manufacturers, and endorsed by various "real deal" dudes that light u ponly a portion of the reticule, from a dot, to a horshoe, etc.

[Ordnance]

and I'll say the same thing to you that I say to everyone that spouts that nonsense...

Heavier is heavier! nobody in their right mind is choosing a heavier item over a lighter one when the lighter one works just as well. No matter the strength of the person, you can carry X weight for Y time, and as X increases, Y decreases. That's just a plain fact. More weight leads to quicker fatigue whether you're Lou Ferigno or Ed Grimley.

Then you don't shoot a lot of positional shooting at distance. And I never said to load it up as heavy as possible like you're implying. Weight reduces recoil and improves stability in positional shooting. Fact is a majority og guys who want their equipment super light are the same ones who throw eveything including the kitchen sink on their rifle to make it look tacticool and only do 16oz curls then complain about weight.

[Ordnance]

Not necessarily.

There are plenty of optics, even from higher-end manufacturers, and endorsed by various "real deal" dudes that light u ponly a portion of the reticule, from a dot, to a horshoe, etc.

Yeah I'm well aware of ACOGs and Leupolds latest adventure with illuminating which are a joke. And those guys are using them for mostly quick engagements and not submoa precision shooting. Most high end manufacturers whether its S&B, NF, USO, Vortex Razors, Premier, Kahles, etc light the whole reticle. And before you start throwing out stuff like "real dudes" I shoot and train with MANY professionals both who are real as it gets, so you can stow that because it doesn't impress me when people try to pull that card.

[gatordev]

Trying to keep this on track without wading into the pissing match...

I don't like BDCs because I think they're a joke unless you're shooting the exact load, in the exact conditions, with the exact same platform it was developed for. You're definitely on the right track developing your own dope and using the reticle as such. As for heaviness I'll say the same thing to you that I say to everyone to be fair... Go work out, lol! The better glass is always going to be on the heavier side, but with it comes all the advantages. I also like a heavier rifle if I'm going to be doing more precision distance shooting. The weight reduces recoil which improves tracking, and it helps create more stability for positional shooting.

Meh. If I'm shooting with a variable optic that goes down to 1x (or nearly 1x), I'm probably running the gun in a more dynamic way (with no one shooting back at me) rather than positional precision shooting. I'm not saying that's how everyone should run it, just how I'd probably be doing it. So having something that is heavy doesn't make as much sense. Everything I've read about the SWFA 1-6 seems like it's one sweet scope and is pretty much what I've been looking for, except it's heavier than an Elcan (!), which is also variable and has clear glass (albeit a more expensive). Just stuff I've been putting my personal equation for future purchases. That's also why I'm thinking about the 1-4 as the best compromise.

As for BDC vs. mil, overall, I think we're on the same page, but for me I think it's more valuable when switching between calibers (to me) than worrying about loads. Whether it's at 5000' DA or sea level, once re-zeroed, I find that M193 and some flavor of MK262 still are only about .1 or .2 mil off from one another in practical terms out to 400m from a good barrel. Start bringing wind into the picture and I find I'm more of the problem than the various load differences.

[Naytwan]

This optic looks interesting.

I'm tempted to buy one to try it out. Anyone find a good price on these?

I have one. Its a good scope. I just wish the battery held up longer. I've left it on by accident and come back to find a dead battery. Its dead right now. I really like the lever.

[tact]

I'll say SR6.....but then again it might tip the scales a few ounces or so.

[gatordev]

I'll say SR6.....but then again it might tip the scales a few ounces or so.

It tips the scales, alright...of my wallet. But go big or go home, right?