/k/ - Weapons

>>662432

VCOG is another good option if you can afford it, but elcan is generally a meme. what do you want it for, because that will determine which one you need more than anything.

>>662432

what makes it easier to "get sight picture" in scope more than other scope?

>>662444

i want something versatile and durable for a .308.

i want to be able to shoot close quarters while also pushing my rifle to the limits of it's capabilities.

i want to run any sort of drill, competition, or milsim without worrying about breaking my expensive optic.

i want it to be durable, long range, close range, and reliable.

why is elcan a meme? being used by special operations must be worth something.

>>662461

In my experience, elcan usually has pretty good glass and is durable, but the eye relief is generally poor. What price range are you going for?

>>662461

for a 308, tbh a red dot with magnifier would be fine, unless you want a DMR, where I would recommend getting something like a leupold or Schmidt & bender with adjustable magnification no greater than 5 times magnification. several of trijicons ACOG series day/night systems are designed with bullet drop in mind. There is also https://www.browe-inc.com/ if you want something like an ACOG but battery powered (might be a bit pricey) browe optics are made by a former trijicon engineer with a lot of improvements on the optic. A set 4x magnification is fine for both close and intermediate range use.

On the low end, leupold makes some budget scopes, and I used to use a cheap nikon I bought at an outdoor store on my PTR because it was discount as fugg. I have since replaced it with an aimpoint and can still get 2MOA with a bipod (also with poor vision)

>>662460

i might be using that term wrong. i was referring to eye relief.

>>662464

eye relief was said to be good on the spectre tr. they're both expensive scopes, at over 2.5k, although the spectre costs more.

my general philosophy is that it's better to save for something good than skimp to save a few bucks.

too many times i've felt buyer's remorse for going with a cheaper option.

>>662468

At 2500 you really have almost everything on the table. Comfort should be what you go for. see if you can finger fuck some trijicons, which are really desinged for versitile use and have been proven in combat for years (I would avoid their REFLEX ACOG line though, which is basically a shitty aimpoint)

>Schmidt & Bender 1.1-4x20 Short Dot CQB Riflescope with CQB Reticle

>Trijicon VCOG®

>Leupold Mark 6 1-6x20mm

look at something like those, and it might be what you are looking for if you are willing to hand out money.

cheaper options like

>TA11J-308: Trijicon ACOG 3.5x35 Scope, Dual Illuminated Red Crosshair .308 Ballistic Reticle w/ TA51 Mount

Might be of interest. The biggest thing is if you are just going to keep your scope zoomed in all the time, there is no point in buying something with an adjustable magnification

>>662467

>>662476

as i said, i want to push my rifle to the limit of it's capablities, but i also want to use it close range.

going from 1x to 9 or 10x is really appealing.

if it doesn't have true 1x, if it doesn't go up to at least 8x, i'm not interested. the two in the OP piqued my interest the most.

i should have mentioned this earlier, but i'm also gonna use it with 6.5cm.

i'm gonna get an mdr and take advantage of the multi-caliber aspect of it.

one optic for full power cartridges, one optic for intermediate cartridges.

>>662468

is Eye Relief just a distance and is long or short better, or is it also a "quality" somehow?

is "good" mean there is a range of distance where stuff looks good VS narrow range?

>>662493

i meant that it was forgiving, you can hold weird angles and quickly aquire the reticle without issue.

>>662512

needs more ZOOM

I have been thinking an optic for my PTR for a while spilt between

ACOG 4x + RMR

>lighter of the two

>premarked for bullet drop

>extremely rugged construction

>no need for batteries

<might need a high chin weld for the red dot, certainly would for a PTR. Might even need a cheek riser.

<about 2,300 US depending on reticle

Eotech + Magnifier

>about 600 US for the combo

>different magnifications depending on model

>Magnifier can be removed/attached easy if really necessary

<almost twice the weight and bulk

<battery life is subpar

Eotech is preferred for the parallax but could be switched to something with better life like a holosun.

>>668893

>Eotech is preferred for the parallax

Eotech was at the heart of a huge scandal where it was revealed the POA and parallax of their sights varied with temperature. And where are you seeing an Eotech+magnifier for only 600? You're generally looking at 500+ for the sight alone, plus another 200-400 for the magnifier depending on how much you cheap out. And how are you paying 2,300 for an ACOG+RMR? 1100 for the ACOG plus 400 for the RMR puts you at 1500 for the whole deal. If I were you, I'd go for an ACSS reticule ACOG+RMR. The chinweld problem can be solved in one of two ways: Either get a 45 degree offset mount for the RMR, or keep the topmount, but rotate your rifle 45 degrees counterclockwise instead, so that the RMR is right in front of your left eye.

>>668904

It has been quite a while since I have at the prices of Eotech I just remember the sights being around 400 and the magnifers 200. I just checked Trigcons website however price varies between 2,100 and 3000

https://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product2.php?mid=ACOG%20/%20RMR%20Combo

>>668893

I run a 4x ACOG on the Trijicon mount so I can use tandem sights, not just iron backup. I don't have a cheek rest on my PTR's German wood stock, but I can shoot pretty good without it to be honest. If anything I can add a leather one maybe, but then it will put me too high to use the irons if I want, but you are better off maximizing the gun for primary use sight over secondary considerations. Your stock will probably be the same shape as mine with the same issues, you might be surprised how well you can adapt to a high cheek position or you might not master it and want a riser.

The sight itself is great, excellent field of view and incredible low light performance. Keep in mind mine enhances muzzle blast and captures the flash gloriously in lower light conditions. Otherwise its a solid choice, if you ever get your mitts on some night vision they will work too. I think the only complaint I had was the poor eye relief, you'll want to get up and close to get the maximum field of view, and with the PTR a little bit of careless handling and poor cheek position might lead you to getting goosed pretty hard in the face by the optic with recoil. I've adopted a cheek weld that's high and a bit back that still allows me to get a good center view minimizing parralax problems while being quick and consistent with bringing the gun up to bear.

Dots are a bit more forgiving and have cheaper options, I woudn't blame you for taking either choice.

has anyone ever done a magnifier + lpvo/magnifier + fixed + offset red dot?

you could get some crazy ranges with that.

>1-6x accupoint and 6x magnifier

>6x acog + 6x magnifier + rmr

no batteries and retarded zoom for 6.5cm shots