As an indication of how much I like the SAI 6 scope, I acquired another to use with the Wilson Combat upper in 300 Blackout I got to use on the Protector S lower. The second scope has the 7.62 bullet drop reticle and although I’m still not a fan of BDC reticles, I figured it would be a little closer to the calibration necessary for the 300 BLK than my earlier 5.56 sight.

One thing I must mention: Earlier I posted that the 1× setting provides a true no-magnification image, and that’s what I believed to be true after initial use of the original scope. Recently, though, I saw a presentation by a Leupold company representative who discussed the effect of changing the diopter setting for reticle focus. He said that changing the setting can result in a magnified image, and that if a true no-magnification view was necessary, the setting should not be changed.

Because of my deteriorating eyesight I did change the diopter setting to sharpen the reticle, and after seeing the discussion about how that could increase the image magnification I went back and conducted a careful test. The result? Sure enough, at the current diopter setting there is slight magnification of the viewing image at the 1× power setting. Based on the Leupold guy’s comments I believe that will be true of all low power scopes having a 1× magnification setting, but it’s something to be aware of.

Bringing this back. Because it’s always nice to find other people who agree with our decisions, the below article by Outdoor Life was gratifying: “The Best LPVO Scopes of 2024, Tested and Reviewed.”

The SAI-6 was listed as the “Editor’s Choice,” which usually means something like “best all-round selection.” I believe the article also does a good job of reviewing 11 other scopes, so it might be something to look at for different selections.

https://www.outdoorlife.com/ge...OmYxvHQ8-hQ10.XJmKie

Since my last previous post there have been some other developments in my experiences with the SAI-6, most notably the two cataract corrections I’ve had that improved certain aspects of my vision.

I also allowed myself to get scared away from using the lightweight Aero Precision mount and therefore switched to similar Warne mounts. But anyone who manages to break or strip out the screws of the AP must be making a dedicated effort as well as ignoring the factory screw torque specifications. The AP mounts may not be best if your combat resupply involves dropping weapons and their optics from aircraft and no parachutes, but I’m pretty sure they are fine for most of us ordinary mortals.

About apparent optical magnification when adjusting the reticle focus: As I noted earlier, I learned that changing the reticle focus setting can affect the so-called 1× magnification of optics, and I found that to be true with the SAI-6. When I had my dominant eye vision corrected to 20/20 I thought that that would eliminate the phenomenon because there wouldn’t be any correction of reticle focus from the factory setting—right? Well, no.

Even now with the magnification set as low as possible (“1×”) and the reticle focus to be sharp with my good vision, there is a bit of actual magnification. It’s not much, and not something I notice even at room-clearing distances without making a concerted effort to see if it’s there, but I estimate it’s actually about 1.2×, not 1× (or zero magnification). After all that I believe that the true explanation for the slight magnification is simply the design of the optic, not something due to the reticle focus. But your mileage may vary.

The last new development is the available scope reticles. As I mentioned before, I am no fan of “bullet drop compensating” (BDC) reticles for a variety of reasons. Because I liked the features of the SAI-6, including its “rapid aiming feature” reticles, though, I decided to hold my nose and ignore the BDC elements of the available reticles when I bought my first two scopes. Ignoring isn’t really that hard, and as I explained, it is possible to sort of use the BDC reticles for ammunition other than what they’re supposedly calibrated for if one will really use one of the scopes to engage targets 600 to 800 meters away.

But what did the company do after I’d bought scopes with BDC reticles for 5.56 and 7.62? Well, of course, they now offer a reticle with conventional milliradian marks on the elevation stadia. And that of course ( ) meant that I had to get a third scope even though I’d probably never use that reticle’s features either. So now one scope sits in dejected isolation hoping to be mounted on something. (Since it’s the one with the 7.62×51mm BDC reticle, it will probably end up on the M1A and everyone will be happy again. Note to self: Do that before summer’s over here in three weeks.)

Before ending this, another comment about the rapid aiming feature (RAF) reticle with its four large pointers that direct one’s eye to the center crosshair, and how it relates to this comment from the Outdoor Life article:
“First, an unilluminated reticle on a 1-to-something-power scope is worthless. You need the aid of a bright, adjustable illuminated aiming point both in low-light conditions and in full sunlight.”

That may be and is probably true of most reticles. If the center aiming aid is just a segmented circle or crosshairs and it’s a first focal plane scope (as I prefer), then if the aid won’t become too large at high magnifications, it requires something to make it visible at low magnifications, and that’s usually daylight-bright illumination. The problem is I don’t like an indistinct glowing dot at the center of the reticle when I’m trying for precise shooting results. I once owned a Leupold scope with “FireDot” reticle that I got rid of in short order for that reason. Yes, most segmented circle reticles have a small center dot that can be seen at high magnifications, but they still rely on illumination to be usable at low magnifications to be seen at all.

I find that the RAF of the SAI-6 makes illumination under normal lighting conditions unnecessary even at the lowest magnification. The pointers are (obviously) small then, but still clearly visible. Under low light conditions or when aiming against a dark background, then admittedly the illumination becomes necessary—just as it is with most scope sights.

Nevertheless, and although I’m not one to obsess over the coming inevitable apocalypse, I still like having a sight or two that will be usable during the End Times troubles when batteries become absolutely unavailable, or when they’re banned because they can be used for evil purposes like in gun sights. In any event, if one requires full daylight bright illumination at all magnifications, then I’ll point out that my three SAI scopes don’t have that. The reticle illumination is visible under low light, such as indoors or against a dark background, but at low magnifications I can’t see it in full sun against our typical light tan backgrounds.

In summary, then: I’m still very happy with the SAI-6 scopes, and I believe I would continue to be even if I owned other types of LPVO sights.

I am finally updating my “go-to” rifle from an OLD Aimpoint Comp M-4 and have an opportunity to pick up a Nightforce NX8 1-8 LNIB for a few hundred more than this SAI. This is my first real dive into serious LPVO so what say the much more knowledgeable of the SF brain trust on this dilemma?

quote:

Originally posted by rkentm:
Nightforce NX8 1-8

Perhaps you saw it already, but if not, the Outdoor Life article does a brief review of that scope as well.

I had seen it, but tend to listen to SF 1st hand opinions more than reviews.

I actually assumed that you had, and I agree about sources of information.

There are limits to how candidly articles like that can or are willing to discuss certain things, and first hand accounts by users who don’t have any conflicting incentives are the best.

quote:

Originally posted by rkentm:
...have an opportunity to pick up a Nightforce NX8 1-8 LNIB for a few hundred more than this SAI.

The NX8 is an outstanding scope, and I have it on a 300blk SBR. Optic quality is very good. The reticle is one of the more usable FFP reticles, working all the way from 1x to 8x. There's no distortion throughout the magnification range -- which often occurs with cheaper scopes. Optic quality is same from center to edge -- something that isn't always there with other brands of scopes.

Of course, optic quality can be improved even more by upgrading to NF's ATACR 1-8x model.

IMO the only downside to the NX8 is that the eyebox is not as forgiving as some scopes. The shooter needs to have his eye roughly in the right place on the the stock. The reticle is useful at 1x, but it isn't like a good RDS -- where as long as your eye is somewhere near the proper head position, the sighting system works.

I don't place much weight on the review by Outdoor Life. The "best for" articles are traditionally bad, regardless of source. Outdoor Life says the NF is best for competition use, but IMO that isn't correct. The NF likely is way better than many of the other scopes for competition, which also means it works very well in other uses. As for their discussion of focusing at less than 100 yards -- I don't have that issue. Note that most of these scopes have fixed parallax, likely at a distance of 100-150 yards. The NF is fixed at 125 yards. So...none of them will be optimal at say 50 yards, but the NF does very well up close.

Fritz, appreciate the feedback greatly!