Who makes it a point to refine their CQB performance while using a magnified optic? I have recently been practicing with a Leupold-equipped rifle, with the magnification turned all the way down to 4.5x. I should clarify that I am talking about an application of a certain amount of precision; not center-mass body shots. But, regardless of target size, who regularly trains up-close, multi-target speed drills with a magnified optic, with no offset/piggyback dot or irons? What do you perceive in doing these drills? What techniques do you apply?

Sounds like trying to force the wrong equipment to work in a place it isn't supposed to. Like using an RPG for room clearing.
You will be quite slow and have clumsy target acquisition due to parallax and eye relief with a magnified optic close up when compared to a dot or even a 1x LPVO.
What would be the reasoning for this exercise?
Sorry to not be able to answer any of your questions.

The idea is to gauge performance potential in a scenario that has you thrust into conditions that aren't ideal for your equipment, as you said. Say your application, circumstances, use-case, whatever you want to call it, dictates that magnification is what you want 80% of the time; performing drills like this helps you make the best of that other 20%. Even with an LPVO with 1x ability, I prefer to leave it at it's higher magnification, to make the most of the observation advantage. If I am confronted with a surprise near threat, I am just going to engage on that high magnification, as opposed to taking the time to crank it down.

A lot of people say "well, if I am doing that kind of shooting, I am going to have such-and-such gun that's catered for it". In an open warfare context, which is the context in which I consider most of my shooting, you may not always be equipped with the perfect tool for the situation in which you find yourself. That's the reasoning for the exercise.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:
Like using an RPG for room clearing.

Well, I do know of an outfit that is tasked with the recovery of nuclear material that uses grenades for that very thing.

To the OP-

Yeah, it can be done. From a technical standpoint, eye relief is the largest enemy with a good quality LVPO. Scope shadowing is really less of a concern. Aaron Cowan had a great video on the topic sometime back.

However, as I’ve said in the past, most all of the units tasked with the primary role of CQB still run a red dot sight set up. Even the military units that *might* be tasked with it as a secondary role run an offset 45 mount.

Yes, you can make it work. From kicking doors for the last 16 years, no it is not optimal. Particularly when the lighting conditions get funky.

I compare this to practitioners of high end competition (pick the game). If it is going to have any advantage at a high level, they’ll be doing it. Now, keeping an open mind is important. And evolving is also important. But, why reinvent the wheel for the sake of difference.

As to particular techniques, I just use the same drills that are staples in my training. I ran a set of drills last Saturday using a Vortex 1-10. Bill drills, 1-4 drills, etc. my favorite here lately has been two targets at 5, two targets at 20. At the five on the buzzer, fire five rounds to the headbox of either target, fire five to the body of the other. Run to the 20, engage five to the clean headbox and five to the clean body. Time and score. You should end with five rounds in both bodies and five rounds in both head boxes. I also enjoy doing throttle control stuff. Generally a target at 5, and a target at 40. Five rounds to close target, five to the far. Trying to keep a good cadence on all with a sharp transition between targets. Time and score.

High magnification on close targets is tough. All you see is blur and motion. If you do get a sight picture and see what you're actually aiming for you'll also need to immediately calculate your holdover. Not exactly efficient or fast.
If there is no way of utilizing another sighting system such as offset irons or red dot then you have to choose between taking the time to hunt for a sight picture through the glass or point shoot.

quote:

you have to choose between taking the time to hunt for a sight picture through the glass or point shoot

I don't know that it's such a hard line between those two choices. With my setup, I could go from low ready to a shot in the head of a life-size torso target in 0.80 seconds. I am sure that's not blazing fast, but it doesn't seem terribly slow. I also did a transition drill using two targets: Headshot, headshot, and back to the first one for three groin shots; 3.13 seconds (if I recall correctly; may have been 3.31). Again, probably not lightspeed for a seasoned CQBer, but I thought it was OK with the 4.5x. It seemed I was putting my eyes on the target, bringing the gun into position, and achieving a hybrid, both-eyes sight picture. Definitely not point shooting, but also not "through the glass" as one probably would when more range allowed a bit more time.

I should have been more clear. All the stuff I do is at 1x.

quote:

I should have been more clear. All the stuff I do is at 1x.

That was understood.

Ran through the same drills again today, but with the Eotech. That 4.5x time from the other day, that I wasn't sure about, was actually 3:18; I had written it down.

______________________Magnified vs. Eotech times:
Low-ready headshot_________ .080 vs. .065
Head, head, 3 groin__________ 3:18 vs. 2:45

I worked no harder on either day, so it's safe to say that, with more practice, times would scale according to these baseline differences.

No surprise that the Eotech is faster, but I still can't complain about the performance through a conventional scope, at 4.5x, in the same circumstances.

I love these threads. You guys are fascinating!

Well, I just finished day two of a five day advanced carbine course. I brought two guns with me but got bullied by a coworker into running a LVPO all week.

It’s actually been an eye opener. They have thrown in a lot of weird positional shooting, shooting on the move, and short stage type drills from up close to 225 yards. I have found that all shooting on the move is much quicker using an offset RMR. I’ve been able to burn a lot of the shooting on the move not using the LVPO. There was a headshot phase moving between 20 and the 10 that I did use the LVPO for.

The long and short is that I signed up for another class and it was cancelled so I got stuck in this one the second year in a row. Said heck with it, I know what’s coming in the class and I’m going to shoot it at a pace that I can harvest 75-80 percent of the points instead on my usual goal of 90. Which means I’ve cranked up the speed to the point of almost losing control. It’s been interesting so far.

At what range, or in what circumstances, do you start to find magnification helpful, in this class? Are you using different magnification levels, or grossly adjusting it between 1x and the max?

We are on a thunder storm break right now. I ran the VTAC 9 hole drill at 50 yard on 3 power and it wasn’t bad. Pretty much outside of 50
Is where the magnification becomes helpful. Yesterday, shooting urban prone was a bit of a pain at 150. Getting a solid position with no scope shadowing was tough. I was on 10 power.

It doesn't surprise me that 10x was tricky in that position. Depending on the objective size, you might be dealing with an exit pupil as small as 2.4mm; that'd be hard to get behind.

Week completed. Fired almost 1400 rounds. In just about every episode, the offset 45 was quicker inside of 50. Almost easier to use when the lighting got funky.

Last course of the day was a ton of awkward positions, with various sized targets ranging from B/C zone steel to poppers at 225. There were 9 different positions. Each position required two shots from each shoulder. The LVPO made the distanced stuff a breeze.