Red Dot Magnifiers - Please School Me

[EODgunner]

Yes, the AR is supper easy to go from set ups meant to shoot from 6 inches to 600 meters. But if you actually start having to carry it around then you start looking away from cool factor and start looking a weight and bulk and your weapon and what you put on it. So the combo of eotech and magnifier is 22.4 oz ( http://www.eotechinc.com/holographic-we ... -magnifier ). Thats the nice small one. A comparable scope like the leupold Mark 4 CQ/T rifle scope ( https://www.leupold.com/tactical/scopes ... flescopes/ ) is 17.5 oz. Now thats really next to nothing in weight difference. But lets look at it both would require you to reach up and manually do something to magnify or un-magnify the optic. So no win ether way. The leupold is a complete package that is going to cost more while the eotech is going to be cheaper and is two different parts. So I would call it a break even but people can and will float to one or the other due to purchasing power and wants. You can buy the leupold with a BDC which is real nice but if you know the specs on the eotech's sight you'll know that you can do a lot with it and it really can work well for someone from that 6 inch to 600m. I hope this has shown you that there are some options. My advice for you is to figure out what the primay purpose of the firearm will be and try real hard to keep that in mind when you finally decide.

Hey EODgunner, I confess that I hadn't considered the Mark 4 CQ/T. Leupold makes a good product.

When I compare it to the 4x32 BAC ACOG, there is a weight difference. I just weighed my 4x32 BAC ACOG's all up weight on my wife's kitchen scale, including the scope, the BOBRO mount, and the Trijicon/Tenebrex ARD, and it was 14.75 oz. Without the ARD, it is 14.0 oz for the scope and mount. The scope by itself is 9.9 oz.

No, the ACOG is not a variable power optic. But:

1. It is in roughly the same price range (well over $1k).
2. It has glass that easily rivals Leupold's quality.
3. The "BAC" aiming system is designed to work at all distances with both eyes open, despite it being a fixed power optic. (I've tried it, and it's not a perfect system, but it does work.)
4. It needs no batteries to illuminate the reticle, and even after the (factory replaceable) tritium lamp has lost its mojo, the fiber optic still works in daylight and will collect the light from a weapon mounted light at night, and (like the Leupold) the reticle still functions without illumination.
5. And.... all up, including an ARD, it weighs 3 oz. less than the Leupold with its mount.

Again, I am not insisting that the ACOG is a better choice, but it does provide everything that the Mk4 CQ/T does, with somewhat different benefits. If it has any downsides compared to the Leupold, it would be these:

1. The tritium will eventually go down. Trijicon warranties the tritium in fiberoptic ACOGs for 15 years. The cost of replacement is apparently a closely guarded secret, but just searching google returns hits on places like AR15.com quoting numbers in the $250-$300 range if the scope is still under warranty but the tritium's warranty has expired. If the scope is no longer under the original limited lifetime warranty for the original owner, for something like $550 they will replace ALL of the scope's internals including the tritium element. If it is still under warranty, or within the 15 year warranty on the tritium element, they will replace all of that stuff for free, and their customer service is highly regarded.......but the tritium doesn't last forever.
2. The Leupold has very slightly better eye-relief..... 2.80 in at 1x, and 2.00 in at 3x, compared to the ACOG's paltry 1.5 in (which is why, in my opinion, the ACOG is not really appropriate for harder kicking rifles like .308s).
3. The Leupold is selling in the real world for about $200 less, (but both scopes are still above $1,000). Those are SWFA prices, and gunshow or Optics Planet prices may vary.

I really like the simple, lightweight T2 Micro, but it has limitations. I suppose I could buy a matching magnifier/mount combo for it, but then I'm kind of back to where I was with my ancient EOTech, and the same issues of weight and less than perfect optics I had before.

The ACOG is a great choice! Love that thing. It really comes down to the purpose of the rifle. If your using it to hunt hogs and such then anything will work. If its sole purpose is home defense then that T2 Micro is THE choice (along with all its different variants and brands). If you're looking at the world ending then once again it doesn't matter (except for that tritium part) pick some stuff, learn it well and have really good friends. Oh and that purpose can often be put simple is distance. 0-25, 0-300, 200-800, 500+ Most red dots find themselves purpose built for that 0-25 with a filling that 0-300 without any problems (well unless your old). Hell there is some that fill that 200-800 on military machine guns. maybe that flip magnifier is the right option. I personally don't like it. I know it locks in place and is held pretty good. I can't get over the fact that its hanging off the side like that. Completely a personal perspective thing i know.

[The Annoyed Man]

maybe that flip magnifier is the right option. I personally don't like it. I know it locks in place and is held pretty good. I can't get over the fact that its hanging off the side like that. Completely a personal perspective thing i know.

Yeah, I don't like it that much either.

[chasfm11]

TAM, I'd l to go to the range with you. It is probably exactly what I need to do next.

From a "need" point, I think that you accurately described what I had in mind. I built the AR to give me a CQB option and want to keep it easily available in that configuration. Your assessment is very accurate for me - I'm looking for help with very rapid target acquisition at something less than 100 yards. While I don't see myself having many occasions to go out past 100 yards, if I do, I'm going to need magnification help and think that there would be time to make an optic change. Since I'm brand new to SBRs, I need to spend some time working at shooting mine better and getting comfortable with with.

Having just gone through (and am still in the middle of ) some very expensive house issues, my funds for the AR project are more limited than I would like. If I can address the CQB requirement now and not preclude a longer range option, that would be my desired path. Like my reading music, I think that my eyes are my weakest link in shooting.

[Bitter Clinger]

If you are Local to the DFW area, you might enjoy visiting with these folks. They provide a good product for the price and they will mount and boresight for you at no charge:

http://www.exploreoptics.com/