IOR Valdada 1.1-4X26 CRT Illuminated Tactical Scope

[adrenaline151]

Anyone have or use one of these? I'm looking for a little more info... what is the battery life? How is it comparable to an ACOG, or Eotech with a magnifier?
Would it be alright for training and competition? Obviously an Eotech or something similar would be better, but the reality of me using it as a CQB type of weapon for anything other than competition is slim to none(I hope). Would it make sense to use a scope like this on my Recce? Basically, if someone is in my house or I need to shoot something at arms length, I will most likely be using a pistol, so this would be for 25-30 yards out, but not more than 250(in a hunting situation).

[Paulo_Santos]

They are very good scopes and built like tanks. The reticle is calibrated for the M4 with the M855 ammo, but it will work very well with other ammo. The battery life is like any other scope, which isn't all that great. The only negative is that the reticle is kind of thin, but for your applications, it will not matter that much.

The variable 1x4 scopes are a compromise. They are not as fast as an Aimpoint or EOTech for CQB work, but past 100 yards, the magnification takes over. If you are only shooting out to 100 yards, an Aimpoint or EOTech are better choices than a variable scope.

[SHIHAN]

The reticle could be brighter on the Valada.

If someone was in your house it would make alot more sense to use a long gun than a pistol.

[louie]

...
The variable 1x4 scopes are a compromise. They are not as fast as an Aimpoint or EOTech for CQB work, but past 100 yards, the magnification takes over. If you are only shooting out to 100 yards, an Aimpoint or EOTech are better choices than a variable scope.

I agree.

I would not recommend this scope for CQB work; for this, you'd be better served with an Eotech or Aimpoint. The IOR 1.1-4x works well for mid-range applications, say 50m out to 100m+. Battery life is what it is with these IOR's.

IMO...Labeling the 1.1-4x IOR as a "CQB" scope is a misnomer. There is no way in hell you can acquire your target as quickly with the IOR 1.1-4x as you can with an Eotech or Aimpoint.

For 0-50m+, I recommend Eotech. I would avoid the "N" battery models, and instead go with a model that uses 123 lithiums or AA's.

[Paulo_Santos]

I agree.

I would not recommend this scope for CQB work; for this, you'd be better served with an Eotech or Aimpoint. The IOR 1.1-4x works well for mid-range applications, say 50m out to 100m+. Battery life is what it is with these IOR's.

IMO...Labeling the 1.1-4x IOR as a "CQB" scope is a misnomer. There is no way in hell you can acquire your target as quickly with the IOR 1.1-4x as you can with an Eotech or Aimpoint.

For 0-50m+, I recommend Eotech. I would avoid the "N" battery models, and instead go with a model that uses 123 lithiums or AA's.

The second generation of IOR 1.1x4 scopes had a much better reticle in which the reticle had a real thick horseshoe on it that was great for CQB, but this 3rd generation's reticle is not as good. (The 1st generation of IOR 1.1x4 had the reticle in the Front Focal Plane which you could barely see at 1.1x).

[louie]

The second generation of IOR 1.1x4 scopes had a much better reticle in which the reticle had a real thick horseshoe on it that was great for CQB, but this 3rd generation's reticle is not as good. (The 1st generation of IOR 1.1x4 had the reticle in the Front Focal Plane which you could barely see at 1.1x).

Yep. Good info!

One thing to consider for CQB scopes/optics is parallax.

The Eotechs and Aimpoints are, for the most part, parallax-free. The IOR requires the operator to rest his/her cheek on the same position on the stock, time after time, in order to align the reticle with the target. This is not the case with the Eotech.