I have access to up to 200 yards range, but in a *cough* "real world" usage, would be under 100 yards, probably under 50. The rifle (Ruger AR-556) has a flat-topped, railed receiver. I have only used the iron sights that it came with. I have a tight budget, but can spare around $350.

Question:
What do I want

Choices:
Dot/reflex/holographic sight by itself
Above in conjunction with flip-to-side magnifier (leaning in this direction)
Low-magnification fixed-power scope
Low-magnification variable-power scope
Other?

 

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

For strictly sub-50/100 yard defensive use, you want a true 1x optic, preferably with unlimited eye relief for rapid acquisition in imperfect positions. That rules out the LPVOs.

Your limited budget rules out buying a quality magnifier and flip-to-side mount in addition to a quality red dot/holo, so that's out. (Though it can be a good option to expand your capabilities down the road, once you save up to add a magnifier later.)

So you're left with the red dot/holo sight as your best option for ~$350 and ~50 yards.

You can get an Aimpoint ACO for ~$350. Or a used Aimpoint PRO. That's likely what I'd shoot for in your budget range. They're excellent quality and duty-rated, plus either one comes with a functional mount included (which can be upgraded later on with something fancier if you want).

Or if you want to go a little cheaper, Sig and Vortex both offer decent optics in the ~$200 range.

Do you have astigmatism? If you do, a RDS might not be the right answer.

quote:

Originally posted by CD228:
Do you have astigmatism?

I do.

You see a lot of concern online about astigmatism distorting red dot reticles. Folks with astigmatism will pick up a red dot in the gun store, stare at the dot itself, and then declare "Well, I guess I can't use red dots, because the dot is all smooshed/starburst/etc."

That is only true if you focus on the dot. Which isn't how you use a red dot.

Red dots are not front sights. You don't focus on the dot like you do with a sight.

When you properly focus on the target, the red dot floating in the middle distance over top of the target is not distorted.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by CD228:
Do you have astigmatism?

I do.

You see a lot online about astigmatism distorting red dot reticles. That is only true if you focus on the dot. Which isn't how you use a red dot.

Folks with astigmatism will pick up a red dot in the gun store, stare at the dot itself, and then declare "Well, I guess I can't use red dots, because the dot is all smooshed/starburst/etc."

When you properly focus on the target, the red dot floating in the middle distance over top of the target is not distorted.

Interesting, I do too. I use the lower dot setting and open both eyes. I still get bloom on the higher setting.

Are you basing that on fiddling with it in your bedroom, or in real world training use or use on the range?

If you've only ever experimented with it at interior room distances, the close distance of the target may be skewing your results. Also be sure that you're actually focusing on the target, not the dot. If you don't have quick and easy access to a range, you might try opening your windows blinds and then focusing on a longer ranged target at 50/100 yards (like a flower pot or mailbox). The red dot should lose most/all of its distortion when you're focused on that target (NOT the dot).

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Are you basing that on fiddling with it in your bedroom, or in real world training use or use on the range?

If you've only ever experimented with it at interior room distances, the close distance of the target may be skewing your results. Also be sure that you're actually focusing on the target, not the dot. If you don't have quick and easy access to a range, you might try opening your windows blinds and then focusing on a longer ranged target at 50/100 yards (like a flower pot or mailbox). The red dot should lose most/all of its distortion when you're focused on that target (NOT the dot).

Qualification and deployment shooting from 7-300 yards. I've got a 200 yard range available too.

Then perhaps your astigmatism is more serious than mine, and the other astigmatic shooters I've worked with.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Then perhaps your astigmatism is more serious than mine, and the other astigmatic shooters I know.

I have to shoot through eyepro with inserts, and I suspect there might be another factor or two, I've also got an enlarged optic nerve with one eye.

If the OP has astigmatism and an RDS isn't their flavor (as mentioned there are various degress of astigmatism). Take a look at the new breed of 1x Prisms, Primary arms makes an affordable one with an ACOG esq reticle.

If you are going to go RDS, I highly recommend Aimpoint. I've used them professionally and personally for 19 years. You'll pay for them, but they are worth it. If you aren't in a hurry the aimpoint PRO used to go on sale around black Friday (YMMV).

You can look at some of the cheaper LPVOs, but you'll have to factor in the mount, so that could break your budget.

Your best bet is to look around and see if there is a spot you can check out multiple optics and see what you like. Some folks like a simple dot, some folks like reticles.

You should also poll your shooting buddies and see what they have. they'll probably let you shoot with them and see how it works out.

I prefer a carry handle over buis for non precision <50 yd. shooting. 50-150yd ish I like my Aimpoint M-ML2 redots.
For potential targets in the distance something like a 1-6 or 8 Lpvo.

The ACO is probably the best bang for the buck if going for a red dot.

As far as a magnifier, may as well just get an LPVO at that point.
But those along with a mount can get expensive fast for something not made in china.

Primary Arms has the Slx micro prisms in 3x and 5x that don't cost much.
Etched reticle and a diopter to get a clear picture if eyesight is an issue.
The 3x would be sufficient for up to 100 yards.
https://www.primaryarms.com/pr...556-308-reticle-yard

For my astigmatism, I much prefer circle dots over plain red dots. I have lots of Holosun and few Aimpoint on my rifles.

quote:

posted by RogueJSK:
You can get an Aimpoint ACO for ~$350.

Is this it? https://aimpoint.us/aimpoint-c...-mount-2-moa-200174/ Just happens to be $349. And with a mount, too. This way it would already be properly torqued and the sight leveled. That looks really good.

In the OP I said I was leaning toward a dot/magnifier combo. This shiny object is what caught my eye: Sig Sauer Romeo & Juliet on Amazon for $309

Yep, that's it.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
In the OP I said I was leaning toward a dot/magnifier combo. This shiny object is what caught my eye: Sig Sauer Romeo & Juliet on Amazon for $309

$249 here: https://palmettostatearmory.co...ifier-sorj5x201.html

That's probably fine for casual use. But the Aimpoint is what I'd bet my life on.

quote:

Originally posted by CD228:
Do you have astigmatism? …

I don't think so. My vision is fine past the end of my arm.

How much training will you be putting towards proficiency?

I keep a red dot only rifle handy as my go-to. No buttons, no switches, an annual battery change and it's left on in place always ready to go and will handle <100yards without thinking about zero, or magnification, or head position, or parallax, etc. - hold under for <25 yards is about the only consideration, but is shared with any sighting system zeroed at a longer distance.

I have several other setups, leaning more toward low-medium variable optics, low-medium fixed optics, and several with backup/piggyback red dots. I don't train with any of them long/well enough to know under duress exactly how to make that optic system come together to make a lethal shot from 0-100 yards. A red dot employed with good fundamentals and a target focus is easily a force multiplier in pretty much every use case under 100 yards - the other options listed have tradeoffs that can be trained around, especially at <25 yards

I choose a 50/200 zero because I know the holds like I know my address, not that I think it's the best or most well suited for my use.

I have a bad astigmatism (worse in my weak eye thankfully) and as mentioned- out in the light it's less of an issue, or typically consistent enough that a POI/POA zero can be achieved, and it doesn't matter except at the edge of 100 yards where a 4MOA dot is still only covering most of a face.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:

quote:

Originally posted by CD228:
Do you have astigmatism? …

I don't think so. My vision is fine past the end of my arm.

Then look hard at the Aimpoint.

As always, what you believe your most important/common use of the gun will be will dictate what the best sight will be. Just as there’s no firearm that’s best for all purposes, the same is true of sights.

At one time I wouldn’t have considered anything other than a good quality nonmagnifying illuminated reticle (red dot) sight on a gun like yours. But that was when having to use it at very close distances against dangerous adversaries was a possibility. Now, however, that’s very unlikely and even though I haven’t changed the sights on a couple of guns, I’ve put together packages that are better suited to what I do and anticipate doing today.

For actually shooting at distances much beyond across the street and at almost any target, a magnified optic will be better for most people than something like a red dot. With practice, target acquisition speed will be only slightly slower (at worst), but target identification and accurate aiming will be better, and often much better. All that being said, though, there are other factors to consider.

A low power variable optic offers the most options for engaging targets at different long distances. I don’t like them as much as an Aimpoint for really close encounters, but at more or less 1× setting, an LPVO is usable. The obvious drawback to any good LPVO sights I’m familiar with is their weight, bulk, complexity—and possibly—durability. Regarding the last, during an exercise years ago I stumbled while walking down a hill. I hit, rolled, and popped back up with no damage or injury to anything except my ego (although I did impress my teammates).

In thinking back about that incident, it occurs to me that one thing I never see mentioned in reviews of LPVO sights is their ruggedness. There have been tests of Aimpoint sights that involve rifles with them attached being thrown out of moving vehicles. Their reputation for durability is one reason why I chose Aimpoints rather than other brands or types of sights. Is your preferred LPVO as rugged? How do you know? Does it matter?
How rugged does your sight have to be? Have you even given the question any thought?

Another consideration with an LPVO is the type of reticle it has. Is it first or second focal plane? How would that affect how usable the sight would be at different distances? Most such sights rely on illuminated reticles to be visible under certain circumstances. My preferred SAI 1-6× scopes have reticles that make it relatively easy to see them at the first focal plane and at the lowest magnification settings, but that may not be true of all scopes. I like FFP scopes because their reticles can be used for accurate point of aim holdoffs at any magnification, but many people don’t consider that to be an important feature.

The variable power of an LPVO is obviously an advantage much of the time, but it can actually be a drawback sometimes. The extra moving parts can go out of order, and what if we start to engage a target only to discover that the magnification is set too high or too low? At least with fixed magnification or no magnification, there’s never any surprises.

As a final comment, I have no experience with flip-off magnifiers and red dot sights. They seem to offer the best, or at least better options in some ways, but I’ve never been attracted to them. I like to keep my serious rifles a little less complicated and less burdened any more than they are. I also wonder if they are as good for longer distances as an LPVO.