[owenslee]

At the risk of attracting incoming fire...

I would like to share an alternate, but often-unpopular viewpoint when it comes to selection of optics by forum members.

The ongoing discussions of Aimpoint, EoTech, Trijjicon ACOG, S&B Short Dot, Nightforce, IOR Valdada, Leupold, et al...serve a useful purpose, but they are not for everyone.

Many on this site are current LEO and Military where their equipment HAS to be the best available as their lives and the lives of others depend on total reliability and function.

However, there is a group of us…many ex military, ex LEO and civilians who do not expect to be thrust into harms way anytime soon. Granted, we are all at risk for home incursions and certainly don’t want to risk our families and our own lives to “cheap” BSA or Leaper’s optics...

However, there is a middle ground where excellent functional equipment can be bought for 1/3 the cost of the best available options. As examples, I would offer the 10x-42M Super Sniper scope which has proven to be a very good, cost effective alternative to a $1200 optic. The Weaver 1-3x V3 is another excellent example, as is the Millet DMS-1 1- 4x red dot variable scope.

Are these products the best available? NO… Have some of these products been good enough to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan without failure…Yes.

The point is that the budgets of some on this forum cannot afford an Aimpoint with 3x magnifier and Larue mounts...nor can they afford a 1 x 4 SB Short Dot. But they can afford a $199 Millet DMS-1 that provides an acceptable, very functional alternative with a true 1- 4x variable scope and an illuminated reticle that has proven to be an outstanding reticle for short engagements as well as precision shots to 300 yds.

In my case I own multiples of all of the alternate products mentioned and do not feel at all at a disadvantage. In some scenarios I feel I actually have an advantage in versatility to an Aimpoint with multiplier. I am certain I can effect a more accurate shot at longer range with a DMS yet give up nothing at 1x with the “dot in a donut” reticle, at close range.

I understand the need to discuss the best products available for a given mission. But my point is that some missions in civilian life are not so critical as to eliminate less costly, but fully functional alternatives from consideration.

Let’s not summarily exclude these affordable and functional optics solely because they are not top shelf.

I don’t drive a Mercedes… I get along just fine with an Acura. The same logic applies to my selection of weapons and equipment and I think it is an opinion shared by many on this forum. Let’s not overlook the less expensive alternatives.

OK…I’ll get off my soap box now and take cover…

Kerry

 

[paulosantos]

Kerry, I don't think you are going to get any arguments with your thinking. Everyone should buy what is best for them and something that is in their price range. Pick the best optic for you.

Anything and everything can and will break. I had a $1000 scope where the reticle rotated on me.

 

[ccoker]

true
and you get a point of diminishing returns

I just want stuff that works
I have killed a lot of game with 2-300 scopes and never had a problem with any of them

for me, I have gotten spoiled on the better glass and image quality of the better scopes

if someone says they want a good scope for not a lot of money I usually recommend the Nikon Monarchs

I am doing more night time hog hunting and that has made it more challenging
I want something that works up close and fast, has great clarity for night and can reach out to say 2-300 yards confidently

I was out last night hunting and am starting to really question the need for ill reticles for night hunting as most are too bright, obscure the target and dialate my pupil
last night I 2 ***** and turned off the ill ret

I can get by in legal hunting time with most any decent scope and at night I am using a red led light setup

good reality check as a lot of us get all wrapped around the axle about this stuff
I know I have an obsessive compulsive disorder

 

[Poor Knight]

For the same reason I bought an LWRC 6.8 mm M6A1 for $2000 instead of a 30-30 for $200. If I just wanted something to shoot, hunt, and that provided self -defense out to 100 yds I could go with the 30-30. BUT I wanted the tacticool 8) package with the ACOG that looks like what the Marines are using today in the GWOT and got it in a caliber that can be used for hunting.

It's hard to understand -- my wife still doesn't get it!

The practical truth? None of us NEED an AR or these fancy scopes -- we just LIKE them.

No one needs a Porsche -- a Civic will get you around town just fine.

We're just arguing amenities -- do you really need rain-sensing wipers or can you just flip the lever when its raining? We've all already made the decision for the sportscar by even being on this 6.8 forum. :lol:

 

[Zippy]

I don't drive a Mercedes… I get along just fine with an Acura. The same logic applies to my selection of weapons and equipment and I think it is an opinion shared by many on this forum. Let's not overlook the less expensive alternatives.

LOL, you drive an Acura, you could afford any of those optics if you cared to, you DECIDED to allocate your resources differently and get an Acura instead of a Hyundai. Nothing wrong with that, it's a value judgment and this is America. There is no reason a car forum should avoid discussing, BMW's, Porsches, Corvettes, Vipers and other fun cars because someone has decided to allocate their resources differently, nor should this forum. There are very few of these optics that are beyond the reach of folks out there if they really wanted them, it's just that they've decided they don't want to allocate their resources that way.

I own an EOTech because that was the point on the curve where I thought my needs for this weapon were met. I arrived at that decision by studying all the gear out there and determining what best met my needs. I'm real glad that the folks here (among other places) discussed all the gear that they did.