For those who don't want to click through to Youtube, sit through ads, or listen to 8 minutes of commentary, here's an embed of just the <50 seconds of bodycam footage:

Passive aiming of nods through a pistol equipped with RMR or DPP has put down many a terrorist in the hands of US tier-1 soldiers. I think an ACRO P2 in the piggback role will certainly suffice on a carbine. A 1.93 offset ACRO P2 is very useable passively with nods.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: JoshNC,

I have no doubt that a piggyback Micro or Acro will suffice; I'll just have to try it myself to see how close it is to a stand-alone Eotech. If you get to where you're using either a piggyback or offset before I do, I will be eager to hear what you think. I also encourage you to try an Eotech on a riser as well, to get that comparative note. I'll invest in a T2 long before an Acro, as I have a rifle that will host the T2 as it's primary, if I am not totally smitten by the piggyback setup.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: KSGM,

I’ll be shooting a nv 2-gun in August. Will likely run an ACRO P2 in a 1.93 offset. In addition to DIRV. A friend just used his ACRO with nods and said it’s great. The ACRO form factor is better for offset and piggback. And it has t2 level battery run time. I have many aimpoint micro - T1, TL, T2, and compM5, one ACRO P2. I’ll be getting more ACRO. My point is, don’t immediately write off the ACRO.

I'll be very interested in your experience. I am not writing off the little Acro; if I could have it my way, I'd have one piggybacked right now. I have other uses for the T2 though, so it makes more sense for me at the moment.

I did this "exercise" for years. I settled on a LPVO, 14.5 barrel. 5.56 using heavy for caliber bullets (75 grain TAP). There was no chance I would use or trust any kind of detachable optic mount. They might be perfect, but I would be too nervous about a shift or failure. I'd rather work around the limitations of my equipment than introduce a potential weak point.

quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:
I need to create a quick-deploying stable shooting system.

quote:

Originally posted by IndianaBoy:

quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:
I don't have (or haven't taken the time to create) a platform with which to truly hold the rifle stable;

If you aren't shooting these tests from heavy bags or at the very least a solid bipod and a good rear bag, the data is going to be questionable. Any kind of load development or accuracy testing needs to done from a very stable platform.

Yep. And here's a stable platform -- bipod and rear bag.


In steel matches where we start with standing, pack slung, and rifle in hand pointing down range, most shooters have no issues going to bipod prone and having their first shot on target within 20 seconds. When we don't have to deal with a pack and time is of the essence, standing to first round on target can be around 10 seconds.

As for stability, 5 rounds of 6.5 Creedmoor, 100 yards, cold bore group. Yeah, I know it's a refrigerator trophy.


6.5CM again, cold bore on the left plate, second shot on the right plate, 577 yards. Winds from the left, with around 12" of drift. 12" plates. JC Steel targets has used this picture on their website for some time.


6.5CM again, 1200 yards, winds 20-25 mph from the right -- meaning 12-15 feet of bullet drift. 24" plate, about 12" vertical variation, which translates to 1 MOA of vertical dispersion.


Bipods are fast to deploy, functional, and stable.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: fritz,

quote:

I'd rather work around the limitations of my equipment than introduce a potential weak point.

I am usually this guy. The desire to maximize NV functionality is a big factor, in my consideration of optics. Do you use NV? Do you use a silencer?

quote:

here's a stable platform -- bipod and rear bag.

I do have a Harris with a QD mount, and an Atlas lives on my LE901(not QD). I'll start employing the Harris, for any evaluations; I had honestly not thought about it.

I'll coincidentally perform a small test on Sunday. I am getting together with some other shooters, to take some runs through a course of fire, in the woods. I want to use an upper of mine that hasn't seen much use, in addition to my recent go-to gun. I am going to lash the upper to the outside of my pack, for the short trek in, just to see how that shakes out.

I think the most logical course of action, if using JoshNC's multi-upper system, in my environment and use-case, is a primary 16" with LVPO, white light, and silencer; and an alternate 10.5" for CQB/night, with an Eotech, white light, IR aiming tools, and the same silencer swapped over.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: KSGM,

quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:
[QUOTE]I'd rather work around the limitations of my equipment than introduce a potential weak point.

I am usually this guy. The desire to maximize NV functionality is a big factor, in my consideration of optics. Do you use NV? Do you use a silencer?


Yes to silencers. No to NV.

Popped off the Huey and mounted a EoTech EXPS. First three rounds printed a neat group 1 inch left at 50. Made the adjustment and three rounds later was centered.

I can't seem to leave stuff alone long enough for it to matter and have to re-zero anyway.
Single optic per rifle but I keep moving them around.

Until my shooting skills improve I don't think I would even notice a small shift on my QD ones if it's on the same rifle.

From the video's I've seen where the scope and mount are on a fixture with a calibrated target at 25 yds they have been generally within .1 mil.

When done repeatedly they seem to shift for the first one or two and then settle in.
I seat the mount to the rail by torqueing to spec a few times or working the QD levers a few times, then zero the optic.

Interesting topic, so here's my experience. I've dismounted numerous RDS\CCO's as well as actual rifle scopes on numerous different firearms. The pistol RDS's have all been Ultradot Match Dots on bullseye pistols, and they all used short throw individual rings. As long as the same sight went back on the same pistol, I was within 1 MOA at 25 yards with my match ammo.

Rifles were a different story. I've never gotten a anything near a RTZ with individual rings, but with one piece mounts as long as the same scope ends up on the same rifle I get the same results I got with the pistols, but at 100 yards.

Both of the above assume I either reinstall a single throw mount, or use identical torque wrench settings. Any deviation to the the torque, or if I have to unscrew and retorque the actual scope rings or RDS mount to base, and all bets are off.

This is a good one that shows reticle movement while torqueing it down.
The ADM at the end was spot on.

quote:

No to NV

This is where much of the struggle lies. If I wasn't trying to use the same rifle effectively in the dark, the GP gun wouldn't be as tricky to configure.

quote:

Popped off the Huey and mounted a EoTech EXPS

Was that Eotech previously zeroed to that rifle? If not, try doing an off/on exercise with it, to see how the RTZ is, with the Eotech mount.

quote:

I get the same results I got with the pistols, but at 100 yards

If by same results you mean 1MOA, then that would be consistent with the performance I have seen out of this ADM.

I did some shooting yesterday, and had a couple relevant take-aways. First-off, I had a second upper with me, in a canvas sleeve, attached to the outside of my pack. Obviously it added weight to my pack, but the bigger problem was the bulk; it did get hung-up when negotiating some vegetation; it was a 14.5" pin/weld build, with no can attached, to give an idea of length. Especially when I consider that, in the two-upper scenario, it's the longer of the two that will be on the bag, in the dark, when I can't see my surroundings as well, in order to navigate them, the snag factor is a potential problem.

Another note, which is nothing new, but maybe something I'll start considering with renewed vigor, is white light accidental discharges. A light is something that's always agreed-upon as essential, in the context of a KISS or HD carbine, and it has a place on the GD carbine too, but the context of the GD carbine is such that an activation when undesired could be more consequential than in those other applications. Pressure switches are a tricky thing; we want them to be easy to activate, so they won't cause problems when we need them, under stress, when dexterity may be limited; but the easier we make them to activate, the easier they're potentially activated when we don't want them. All my lights are SF "vampires", so they have White and IR settings; some also have an "off" position; I need to start being more pro-active about using that "off" setting, or perhaps look into some flip-up lens covers, or even just apply some tape to the front of the light, which could be easily torn off.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: KSGM,

I don’t, of course, know all of your concerns, but about the light problem, perhaps a different model would work better for you—and assuming I understand it.

I prefer the INFORCE models over those having tape switches because I find them easier to operate. For your concerns, they also make it easy to avoid unintentional white light activations. The white/IR models have a rotating lever switch that sets the light to either IR or white. That switch is unlikely to be moved to the white position if rotated to IR. There is also a rotating cover for the light switch that seems to work well.

But for extra security, the light can be turned off completely by just rotating the bezel a few turns. That’s very easy and positive even with gloves.

I have considered Inforce more than a couple times.

All of the SF Vampire functions are in rotation of the bezel: white, off, IR, and then back the other way. The activation is in a click tailcap, a remote tape switch tailcap, or a combo click and tape switch socket tailcap. The combo is preferred, as you retain a click tail, in the event of tape switch failure. The click tail would be very difficult to inadvertently activate, so the pressure switch is the worrisome point.

A perk of the SF lights, or their derivatives, is the abundance of compatible options from other companies. Unity Tactical makes some very intuitive switches, which work very well for my NV setups. Because my illuminator (the Vampire) and my laser are different units, it can be difficult to activate them simultaneously. Unity makes a switch with two buttons that allows you to activate one component by itself, or both together, by only pressing one of the two available buttons.
https://www.unitytactical.com/...nc-surefire-laser-9/

This takes us back to the Inforce. I have used configurations with a click cap for the Vampire, and a tape switch for the laser; and configurations with an independent tape switch for each item; both require more dexterity than the Unity button, if you want to activate both items at the same time. The Inforce, with it's angled button, would be an in-between, relative to the two aforementioned configurations. It sounds like the Inforce has every feature of the SF light, minus the availability of remote switch support, which can make the difference. All depends on what the user wants/needs. If not using a separate laser aiming tool, that he'd want to sometimes activate at the same time, the Inforce would be a just-as-good, and likely more cost effective option, compared to the Vampire.

A friend taught me to place the white light activation button sufficiently behind the IR activation button, so it is a very conscious effort to fire the white light. My DIR-V and white light both get their own Modbutton Lite.

Inforce is hot garbage compared to Arisaka/Malkoff, Modlight, and SF options.

This talk of IR stuff is relevant in my consideration of the general purpose carbine, but these subtler nuances serve to convolute this discussion. Please dedicate any further IR laser/illuminator talk to the night vision thread.
https://sigforum.com/eve/forum...935/m/6590029484/p/8

KSGM I've stayed on the sidelines in this as I don't happen to think the original premise is very sound. Tell me again what (in an situation where normal civil law still applies) where a 10-12" AR with at red dot, magnifier if you must) NV, appropriate lights in IR and visible and an IR laser and a suppressor will not get the job done in any range where 'civil law' might allow you to engage a target. Once we are past that legal situation not a chance on the planet I'm staying with a single AR.