Educate me about scopes

[GeekwithaGun]

geekwagun, what mount do you use for the Accupoint?

The guy had it, I beleive it is a Nikon, but will have to look tonight.

I didn't have my specs right, this is exactly what I have "Trijicon TR21G Accupoint 1.25-4x24 Green Triangle" I beleive it is the 1" tube

[RX8er]

Speaking of batteries, what do you guys think of this scope? Trijicon 3-9x40 AccuPoint? A little on the pricey side (for me) but no batteries. I have to admit, the battery thing bothers me a little. And TAM, I'm worried about eye relief on that Burris 5x36. From what I'm reading you can't mount BUIS behind it, because it has to be all the way to the back on the rail.

I have the accupoint 1.25-4x40 - TR21G on my AR-10 and love it. Very clear glass and I really like the post and triangle reticle. I originally wanted the 1-4 magnification to have true 1x like a red dot, but settled for this one as I found it used, but LNIB and couldn't pass it up.

I like being able to use it with both eyes open, there is a 3" eye releif and on the AR-10 is perfect for me. Thinking about a 3-9x or higher magnification for longer ranges, but so far this is working great.

I'm shopping for my Sig 716 and haven't look at this one. Thanks for posting!!!

[GeekwithaGun]

The mounts are the Nikon P-Series

Found a link on amazon and these are or are similar to what I have.

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-826-P-Serie ... B007PERIHW" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think if I were to get another higher power scope I would get a quick release mount for both so I can swap them for different purposes. For now these will do for the purpose, plus they were included with the scope.

[The Annoyed Man]

Speaking of batteries, what do you guys think of this scope? Trijicon 3-9x40 AccuPoint? A little on the pricey side (for me) but no batteries. I have to admit, the battery thing bothers me a little. And TAM, I'm worried about eye relief on that Burris 5x36. From what I'm reading you can't mount BUIS behind it, because it has to be all the way to the back on the rail.

Trijicon Accupoints have amazing glass. It is true that the Burris 536 has limited eye relief. I can fit the rear iron sight there, but I can't raise it without removing the scope. But I also have a Fastfire II on an angle mount, so if I have to shoot at distances where the 5X just isn't practical, that sight is available to me. Worst case, the scope comes off and the irons get deployed.

[Capt Jeff]

I just got an AIM Sports scope for my AR. Variable power 3-9x and an illuminated reticle. Had it out on the range last week for sighting in. Worked great and the cost was just under $100 at Sportsman Guide.

http://aimsportsinc.com/products/1087-3 ... l-dot.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is mated to a quick-connect picatinny base so swapping with another optic is easy.

[baldeagle]

You'll have to let us know how it holds up. The reviews are mixed, to put it mildly. My decision is starting to coalesce around a Millett 4-16x50 TRS-1 Tactical 30mm Riflescope with a SWFA SSALT 30mm Scope Mount. That seems to be the best bang for the buck in a mid-range scope that can reach out and touch a hog at the maximum range I could hit one at, and it's illuminated mildot reticle ought to help me in darker light. After hours and hours of reading, I think the red dots and ACOGs are more suited for close range tactical work, and I don't anticipate doing a lot of that. Once my wife recovers from the shock of me buying the 300 Blackout upper some day (you want to spend another! $500???), I can put the Millet on that and get the Bushnell TR-25 for the 5.56 upper for three gun.

[The Annoyed Man]

....ACOGs are more suited for close range tactical work....

Just to be clear, the reticle on the Trijicon ACOG is regulated out to something like 600 or 800 yards, and the reticle on the Burris 536 is regulated out to 600 yards. If you ever shoot anything beyond 300 yards with a carbine length AR, it will be a miracle. I've got nothing against 4.5-14x50mm scopes. I have a Leupold like that on my R700.......but the reticle on that scope is ALSO regulated to 600 yards, and that's for a .308. I just wanted to dispel the notion that an ACOG is only good for short range work. BTW, a .300 Whisper/Blackout has about the same effective range as 5.56 or maybe even a little less.

[baldeagle]

....ACOGs are more suited for close range tactical work....

Just to be clear, the reticle on the Trijicon ACOG is regulated out to something like 600 or 800 yards, and the reticle on the Burris 536 is regulated out to 600 yards. If you ever shoot anything beyond 300 yards with a carbine length AR, it will be a miracle. I've got nothing against 4.5-14x50mm scopes. I have a Leupold like that on my R700.......but the reticle on that scope is ALSO regulated to 600 yards, and that's for a .308. I just wanted to dispel the notion that an ACOG is only good for short range work. BTW, a .300 Whisper/Blackout has about the same effective range as 5.56 or maybe even a little less.

{{{groan}}} I guess I have more reading to do....

[GeekwithaGun]

....ACOGs are more suited for close range tactical work....

Just to be clear, the reticle on the Trijicon ACOG is regulated out to something like 600 or 800 yards, and the reticle on the Burris 536 is regulated out to 600 yards. If you ever shoot anything beyond 300 yards with a carbine length AR, it will be a miracle. I've got nothing against 4.5-14x50mm scopes. I have a Leupold like that on my R700.......but the reticle on that scope is ALSO regulated to 600 yards, and that's for a .308. I just wanted to dispel the notion that an ACOG is only good for short range work. BTW, a .300 Whisper/Blackout has about the same effective range as 5.56 or maybe even a little less.

{{{groan}}} I guess I have more reading to do....

Go with the 7.62 NATO/.308 - I'll let you come and shoot my setup if you want. I want to get to Elm Fork and sight it at 100yards, when I do I will give you a heads up if interested.

[baldeagle]

Go with the 7.62 NATO/.308 - I'll let you come and shoot my setup if you want. I want to get to Elm Fork and sight it at 100yards, when I do I will give you a heads up if interested.

I'm definitely interested. I think I need to actually look through some scopes before I spend the money to get one. I don't need to shoot it. I can watch you work and learn a lot that way.

When you're a neophyte like me and you do a lot of reading about the subject, your heads starts spinning with all the facts and figures and opinions. At some point hands on has to help sort out the issues and clarify what will work best for me. I was looking at (reading about) ACOGs last night - the small ones are less than $900, which, when you add in the cost of mounts, is about the same as some of the better scopes like Trijicon or Accupoint (but not in the "insane" range of the my-wife-would-kill-me multi-thousand dollar Zeiss, Steiner or Swarovski scopes). The lack of magnification in the red dots bothers me though. My eyesight isn't that good any more, so I think I'm going to have to have magnification if I want to shoot anything farther than 100 yards.

I look at things like LaRue mounts @ $200+ and I think, yeah, that would be nice, but dang, I can buy a SWFA mount for $60 bucks or a Burris P.E.P.R mount for about $75. Same thing with BUIS. I can get polymers for about $90 for the set or go with some of the fancier ones for $200+. I'm not cheap and I don't want to buy junk, but I'm also not a world class marksman trying to punch 3 inch groups at 1000 yards.

So, I think my choices are between the red dot/ACOG/aimpoint group of scopes or the more classical variable magnification scopes, but I'm not sure which is the best route to go. I need to look through some scopes and decide based on what I'm seeing or not seeing.

[G26ster]

So, I think my choices are between the red dot/ACOG/aimpoint group of scopes or the more classical variable magnification scopes, but I'm not sure which is the best route to go. I need to look through some scopes and decide based on what I'm seeing or not seeing.

Perhaps I missed your objective in this thread, so pardon me if I did. My aged eyesight led me through the same dilemma. I have magnified traditional optical scopes and red dot type reflex scopes. If you want tight groups at 100 yards, I couldn't guarantee that at all with red dots, as even my smallest dots at 100 yds + would cover the bullseye. Sure the rounds would be close to center, but there was no way to ensure shot after shot that the aiming point was exactly the same. Not so with the magnified optical sights where I could split dead center with the cross hairs in every sight picture. To me the reflex sights are for quick accurate targeting, for defense for example, but magnified optics for target shooting or hunting. As you are building an AR, I would think that the former is the objective, and not the latter, but I don't really know for sure. MHO

[baldeagle]

So, I think my choices are between the red dot/ACOG/aimpoint group of scopes or the more classical variable magnification scopes, but I'm not sure which is the best route to go. I need to look through some scopes and decide based on what I'm seeing or not seeing.

Perhaps I missed your objective in this thread, so pardon me if I did. My aged eyesight led me through the same dilemma. I have magnified traditional optical scopes and red dot type reflex scopes. If you want tight groups at 100 yards, I couldn't guarantee that at all with red dots, as even my smallest dots at 100 yds + would cover the bullseye. Sure the rounds would be close to center, but there was no way to ensure shot after shot that the aiming point was exactly the same. Not so with the magnified optical sights where I could split dead center with the cross hairs in every sight picture. To me the reflex sights are for quick accurate targeting, for defense for example, but magnified optics for target shooting or hunting. As you are building an AR, I would think that the former is the objective, and not the latter, but I don't really know for sure. MHO

I have a two fold purpose. Originally I decided to get an AR simply because the government was thinking about telling me I couldn't have one. I was following the fine old American tradition of "Oh yeah? I'll show you!"

Once that decision was made, then I thought, well, I should use this thing for something worthwhile. TEOTWAWKI is one purpose, obviously, but that's a remote possibility, I hope. Target practice is useful for honing skills, but that's about it. So then I thought, well, I could do some hog hunting with it. If I'm going to hunt hogs, as disgusting as they are, I'd like to kill them humanely. So that means being accurate and hitting the kill zone as much as possible. Without magnification, I doubt I can do that consistently at anything over about 50 yards.

If I ever needed to use the AR for close range defensive work, I doubt I'd have a problem hitting what I was aiming at by simply pointing the gun in the right direction and firing. Close range shooting doesn't take a great deal of skill unless you're trying to hit multiple moving targets quickly. If sixteen gang bangers are coming through my door, I'm in trouble no matter what weapon I use. If two or three are, I can handle that without having to use red dot sights. I'm pretty sure I can hit bullseyes at 100 yards with iron sights. At least I did the last (and only) time I shot an AR. I know I can hit them at 10 or 20 yards. That's why I think my best choice is the traditional magnification type scope, although I'm going to look through both before I decide which is appropriate.

In the end, this is all a "I told you not to mess with me" exercise in the face of Uncle Sam. Or should I not insult poor old Uncle Sam, since it's more accurately the face of Komrade Fed?

[G26ster]

So, I think my choices are between the red dot/ACOG/aimpoint group of scopes or the more classical variable magnification scopes, but I'm not sure which is the best route to go. I need to look through some scopes and decide based on what I'm seeing or not seeing.

Perhaps I missed your objective in this thread, so pardon me if I did. My aged eyesight led me through the same dilemma. I have magnified traditional optical scopes and red dot type reflex scopes. If you want tight groups at 100 yards, I couldn't guarantee that at all with red dots, as even my smallest dots at 100 yds + would cover the bullseye. Sure the rounds would be close to center, but there was no way to ensure shot after shot that the aiming point was exactly the same. Not so with the magnified optical sights where I could split dead center with the cross hairs in every sight picture. To me the reflex sights are for quick accurate targeting, for defense for example, but magnified optics for target shooting or hunting. As you are building an AR, I would think that the former is the objective, and not the latter, but I don't really know for sure. MHO

I have a two fold purpose. Originally I decided to get an AR simply because the government was thinking about telling me I couldn't have one. I was following the fine old American tradition of "Oh yeah? I'll show you!"

Once that decision was made, then I thought, well, I should use this thing for something worthwhile. TEOTWAWKI is one purpose, obviously, but that's a remote possibility, I hope. Target practice is useful for honing skills, but that's about it. So then I thought, well, I could do some hog hunting with it. If I'm going to hunt hogs, as disgusting as they are, I'd like to kill them humanely. So that means being accurate and hitting the kill zone as much as possible. Without magnification, I doubt I can do that consistently at anything over about 50 yards.

If I ever needed to use the AR for close range defensive work, I doubt I'd have a problem hitting what I was aiming at by simply pointing the gun in the right direction and firing. Close range shooting doesn't take a great deal of skill unless you're trying to hit multiple moving targets quickly. If sixteen gang bangers are coming through my door, I'm in trouble no matter what weapon I use. If two or three are, I can handle that without having to use red dot sights. I'm pretty sure I can hit bullseyes at 100 yards with iron sights. At least I did the last (and only) time I shot an AR. I know I can hit them at 10 or 20 yards. That's why I think my best choice is the traditional magnification type scope, although I'm going to look through both before I decide which is appropriate.

In the end, this is all a "I told you not to mess with me" exercise in the face of Uncle Sam. Or should I not insult poor old Uncle Sam, since it's more accurately the face of Komrade Fed?

As you say, you're going to look through both, so that's the best approach. I think for your stated purposes, a quality reflex sight will do the job just fine, and be much lighter. I had an AR with both, at one time or the other, and found with the optical sight it was considerably heavier, but I'm not a big boy or a youngster anymore. And besides, when that hog shrugs off that first shot with that carefully and slowly aimed optical scope, you may wish you had a quick acquisition reflex scope as he snorts at high speed towards you with a vengeance

[baldeagle]

I just ordered this scope from Natchez this evening. Some of you may want to consider one. The price is so low it makes you think there is something wrong with them, but read this thread on Texas Boars before you discount it. There are a couple of very glowing reviews in that thread for this scope. The site admin used it to hunt hogs and closed out his review with this: "Very impressive scope at a very impressive price."

[jmra]

I just ordered this scope from Natchez this evening. Some of you may want to consider one. The price is so low it makes you think there is something wrong with them, but read this thread on Texas Boars before you discount it. There are a couple of very glowing reviews in that thread for this scope. The site admin used it to hunt hogs and closed out his review with this: "Very impressive scope at a very impressive price."

Out of stock.