Hopefully some of you can help me with this. I'm looking to get a good all-purpose sight for my Bushy (bullpup not AR), and have looked at some red dots and some ACOG scopes. I'm thinking red dot, not only because ACOGs are pricey but also because fast acquistion takes predominance over long-range accuracy in priority (may be doing some 3-gun match type stuff in the future). Of course I want both if possible. So my specific questions are:
1. First and foremost, would you get (or do you have and use) a 1 power red dot, or a 2-power red dot? I noticed that Aimpoint has some 2-power models with 2 moa dots which seem like they may be a great compromise between rapid close-in shots on multiple targets and some decent accuracy at range. But, of course, when you compromise, you don't do anything really well. So, do you think the 2 power is significantly inferior to the 1-powers with 4 or 6 MOA dots when it comes to close in rapid target acquisition, or do you not lose too much in that department with the 2 power? And do you know of anyone else with a 2-power besides Aimpoint?
2. If I go with a 1 power, which red dot/amber dot? The trijicon reflex looks good, and doesn't need batteries, but my question on it is, will the ambient-light amber dot still work years from now after the tritium wears out? I assume yes it will, since the tritium is only for low light situations, and a completely separate illuminating mechanism. The aimpoints look good, so do the C-mores, etc. But will the basic Bushnell work just as well - what am I giving up if I go with the Bushnell or something in that price range as opposed to the aimpoint or trijicon reflex? Also, 4 or 6 or larger MOA red dot - which? Also, is there any other advantage/disadvantage to the older-style long-tube aimpoints versus the short-tube aimpoints, other the the obvious difference of being shorter and therefore not in the way as much of your action, etc.
3. Is there anything inherently better or worse about getting a tube-style red dot, like an aimpoint versus a single-glass "projection" red dot, or vice versa? Six of one, half dozen of the other?
4. In one prior thread here on TFL on this subject, one TFLer recommended the trijicon 12 MOA triangle as the best compromise (use the large size of the hollow triangle for fast acquisition, and the top point of the triangle for ranged shots, I believe is how it works - correct me if I'm wrong). So, sounds good, BUT my question on this is: If you have the gun sighted in for the center of the triangle to be spot-on for short range work (50 yards or less), then when you pull the triangle projection DOWN to get the tip on your 100 or 200 yard target, then won't the gun shoot too LOW? You would need to bring the gun UP for the longer target, not down - so it seems to me that Trijicon SHOULD HAVE have made the triangle upside-down, with the point at the bottom instead, so that when you raise up the triangle to put the longer range bullseye at the bottom of the triangle in order to be spot-on for the longer range (zero it at whatever you want - 100, 150, 200), then when you pull the triangle down for close-in work, you still be on target. So what am I missing, or how do you reconcile or explain this? Or is it indeed a flaw in design, in your opinion? Or, is it the case that when shooting that close in, it just doesn't matter if you're 3 or 4 inches off, you're still accomplishing the goal of a COM hit. I guess I just want something that will hit very close at 50 yards when zeroed for 100 or 150 let's say, and it seems that if you zero the top of the triangle for say 150, to get a point blank range of 0-180, give or take, with the TIP of the triangle, then you'd be a good 3-5 inches high at 50 yards if you moved that big old 12 MOA triangle and centered its hollow center on your 25 or 50 yard target. Clear as mud? And if you use the tip of the triangle for close in work as well, then what's the point of the big old quick acquistion 12 MOA hollow triangle? I suppose there may be an answer to that, and it might be that using the entire triangle is ONLY for EVEN-closer-in-work (5-30 yards, let's say), where you'd only be maybe 2 inches high and easily within COM, and maybe not even that high since the bullet path at that point is just reaching the line of sight, coming from down to up still, until about 30 yards. Hmmm, dunno... hope someone can explain this triangle's purpose in terms of yardage to me.
5. Finally, anyone here have and use an ACOG or other good similar scope? What the hell is the deal with all the models? I can't find a single place that comprehensively distinguishes all the differences in the many many models. Which one do you have? What power? Dot or reticle? Etc.
Thanks in advance. If you have any answers to my questions, please reference the paragraph number above that the quesion you're answering is contained in. Thanks.
Edited: Hmm, it seems upon further searching each of the following brands now have models with 4 different reticles/dots each, selected by a selector switch: Bushnell, "Panaroma", and "ATN" - 50MOA circle with 5MOA dot inside, 2MOA dot, plain 1MOA width reticle, reticle with open center, reticle with 5 MOA dot center, etc...Anyone have experience with these? One example of this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1976675220
1. First and foremost, would you get (or do you have and use) a 1 power red dot, or a 2-power red dot? I noticed that Aimpoint has some 2-power models with 2 moa dots which seem like they may be a great compromise between rapid close-in shots on multiple targets and some decent accuracy at range. But, of course, when you compromise, you don't do anything really well. So, do you think the 2 power is significantly inferior to the 1-powers with 4 or 6 MOA dots when it comes to close in rapid target acquisition, or do you not lose too much in that department with the 2 power? And do you know of anyone else with a 2-power besides Aimpoint?
2. If I go with a 1 power, which red dot/amber dot? The trijicon reflex looks good, and doesn't need batteries, but my question on it is, will the ambient-light amber dot still work years from now after the tritium wears out? I assume yes it will, since the tritium is only for low light situations, and a completely separate illuminating mechanism. The aimpoints look good, so do the C-mores, etc. But will the basic Bushnell work just as well - what am I giving up if I go with the Bushnell or something in that price range as opposed to the aimpoint or trijicon reflex? Also, 4 or 6 or larger MOA red dot - which? Also, is there any other advantage/disadvantage to the older-style long-tube aimpoints versus the short-tube aimpoints, other the the obvious difference of being shorter and therefore not in the way as much of your action, etc.
3. Is there anything inherently better or worse about getting a tube-style red dot, like an aimpoint versus a single-glass "projection" red dot, or vice versa? Six of one, half dozen of the other?
4. In one prior thread here on TFL on this subject, one TFLer recommended the trijicon 12 MOA triangle as the best compromise (use the large size of the hollow triangle for fast acquisition, and the top point of the triangle for ranged shots, I believe is how it works - correct me if I'm wrong). So, sounds good, BUT my question on this is: If you have the gun sighted in for the center of the triangle to be spot-on for short range work (50 yards or less), then when you pull the triangle projection DOWN to get the tip on your 100 or 200 yard target, then won't the gun shoot too LOW? You would need to bring the gun UP for the longer target, not down - so it seems to me that Trijicon SHOULD HAVE have made the triangle upside-down, with the point at the bottom instead, so that when you raise up the triangle to put the longer range bullseye at the bottom of the triangle in order to be spot-on for the longer range (zero it at whatever you want - 100, 150, 200), then when you pull the triangle down for close-in work, you still be on target. So what am I missing, or how do you reconcile or explain this? Or is it indeed a flaw in design, in your opinion? Or, is it the case that when shooting that close in, it just doesn't matter if you're 3 or 4 inches off, you're still accomplishing the goal of a COM hit. I guess I just want something that will hit very close at 50 yards when zeroed for 100 or 150 let's say, and it seems that if you zero the top of the triangle for say 150, to get a point blank range of 0-180, give or take, with the TIP of the triangle, then you'd be a good 3-5 inches high at 50 yards if you moved that big old 12 MOA triangle and centered its hollow center on your 25 or 50 yard target. Clear as mud? And if you use the tip of the triangle for close in work as well, then what's the point of the big old quick acquistion 12 MOA hollow triangle? I suppose there may be an answer to that, and it might be that using the entire triangle is ONLY for EVEN-closer-in-work (5-30 yards, let's say), where you'd only be maybe 2 inches high and easily within COM, and maybe not even that high since the bullet path at that point is just reaching the line of sight, coming from down to up still, until about 30 yards. Hmmm, dunno... hope someone can explain this triangle's purpose in terms of yardage to me.
5. Finally, anyone here have and use an ACOG or other good similar scope? What the hell is the deal with all the models? I can't find a single place that comprehensively distinguishes all the differences in the many many models. Which one do you have? What power? Dot or reticle? Etc.
Thanks in advance. If you have any answers to my questions, please reference the paragraph number above that the quesion you're answering is contained in. Thanks.
Edited: Hmm, it seems upon further searching each of the following brands now have models with 4 different reticles/dots each, selected by a selector switch: Bushnell, "Panaroma", and "ATN" - 50MOA circle with 5MOA dot inside, 2MOA dot, plain 1MOA width reticle, reticle with open center, reticle with 5 MOA dot center, etc...Anyone have experience with these? One example of this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1976675220
Last edited:
). I was able to use the mount that Aimpoint used to include with the scope (they don't ship it with the new models).