I'm thinking of an LPVO. Googling seems to point towards a now discontinued Nikon or a Primary Arms 1-6X SFP with the ACSS reticle for 300blk. I'm shooting subsonic exclusively.

Any other ideas/recommendations?

I use that optic on my AR.
50 yard zero, drops about 2” at 100 yd with 200 gn.

quote:

Originally posted by AllenInWV:
Primary Arms 1-6X SFP with the ACSS reticle for 300blk

You should look at the on-line manual for the reticle. Some things to consider:
- As a SFP reticle, the elevation markings are only accurate at 6x, the highest power.
- It appears to me that the so-called 300blk reticle is still marked for average 5.56 trajectories and drops. With a 50-yard zero, the 300 yard hash mark is 100 yards for subsonic 300blk. The 400 yard mark is half way between 125 and 150 yards. The 500 yard mark is 175 yards for 300blk. The 600 yard mark is 225 yards.

quote:

Originally posted by SIGfourme:
50 yard zero, drops about 2” at 100 yd with 200 gn

I experience more drop in my blackout upper. So I ran the numbers in JBM ballistics. 200 grain HPBT, 1100 fps muzzle velocity, 3000' density altitude, 2.5" sight over bore, 50 yard zero.
JBM states there's a 5.1" drop at 100 yards. I concur.

The OP will likely have a 2" sight over bore with a bolt action rifle. JBM predicts a 5.6" drop at 100 yards with this assumption.

AlleninWV -- IMO the scope and reticle type starts with the type of shooting you will be doing most often.
- The type of targets.
- Distances to targets. Will you only be shooting at your zero distance, or will you shoot a longer or shorter distances?
- If you shoot at different distances, do you prefer to dial or hold elevation?
- What are your accuracy expectations?
- Budget, for both scope and mount.

I'll most likely be shooting steel targets from
100-200 meters. As far as dialing in or holding over, I don't have much of a preference though I suspect I'd be more comfortable holding over like I do with ACOGs.

quote:

Originally posted by AllenInWV:
I'll most likely be shooting steel targets from 100-200 meters. As far as dialing in or holding over, I don't have much of a preference though I suspect I'd be more comfortable holding over like I do with ACOGs.

You won't be holding over like an ACOG, in that the reticle isn't calibrated for a subsonic blackout round. Furthermore, if you use different loads, you'll probably need different ballistics conversion notes for each load. You can ballpark the drop compensation on the ACSS reticle by dividing the reticle distance by 3 -- the 300 yard mark on the ACSS is roughly 100 yards for a subsonic 200 grain bullet. But it won't be precise.

IMO a better option for accuracy at various distances is to find a scope with a calibrated reticle. You just develop a dope chart for your intended shooting distances. Keep the chart on you or the rifle, it doesn't matter. But it will be way more precise than the ACSS reticle. FFP or SFP probably won't matter. I suspect you'll shoot at the longer distances at the full magnification of a LPV optic.

Starting with the ballistics data assumptions I presented above, your bullet should drop the following amounts at distances:
5.5" drop at 100 yards
11.2" drop at 125 yards
18.8" drop at 150 yards
28.6" drop at 175 yards
40.3" drop at 200 yards
Subsonic blackout rounds drop like a rock at distance. If your targets are not large, it's pretty easy to miss with vertical holding/dialing errors. The 200 yard drop is 19.3 MOA, or 5.6 mils.

Not exactly apples apples, but I run a Leupold VX-R 2-7 with an illuminated dot on my Ruger Ranch in 7.62x39. Seems to work well for it's intended roll.

I've got both the Nikon and the Primary Arms scopes. The PA BDC is better than the Nikon. Neither are particularly reliable with subsonics, even at 100 on steel, but the PA is better. With supers, both are fine, but I like the PA better.

That said, the PA is a stopgap on the MCX until I can get an Eotech for it. It was originally intended to go on a 12.5" 7.62 AK.

So what I'm seeing is I'd be better off with a MOA/mil reticle, learning my preferred ammo's performance and doing the math.

I really recommend you follow what fritz is saying.

In my opinion, and not to insult anyone for whom they work just fine, but bullet drop compensating reticles are for people who are too lazy to understand and make use of the much better precision possible with a reticle calibrated in milliradians or minutes of angle, and who don’t need or want that precision. I can see how they would be useful for large game hunters at relatively close ranges and military personnel who are shooting at large (man-sized) targets, can fire lots of only one kind of ammunition for suppression or effect, are mostly satisfied if the bullets hit in the general area of the target—and whom we don’t want to spend a lot of time and effort training to use calibrated reticles.

For anyone else, though, especially if they’re shooting at anything other than the round-number ranges on most BDC reticles (100, 200, 300, etc.), shooting different ammunition at different times for different purposes or the constraints of logistics, and want precise results, then get a calibrated reticle.

And using a calibrated reticle really isn’t that difficult.

I just changed the scope on my “precision” 22 Long Rifle Ruger 77/22, and now it has a Leupold Mark 6 3-18×44mm with Horus reticle that wasn’t doing anything else. I zeroed it for 50 yards with my usual ammunition and just started preparing a dope chart for the ammunition and rifle. I did that by firing a group at 100 yards and measured where that was centered with respect to the point of aim: it was 18 centimeters (7.09 inches) low, and that converted to 1.97 milliradians. In other words, I now know that if I’m engaging a target at 100 yards, I’ll dial up 20 0.1 mil clicks or hold 2.0 mils over by using the calibrated reticle to hit it.

Because the subsonic ammunition I prefer (and have lots of) has such a rainbow-like trajectory, I’ll do the same thing for every 10 yards starting at 60 and going out to however far I’ll want to shoot, record the results on a convenient card or perhaps tape on the gun itself, and I’ll know how much to dial or hold over for targets at different ranges. Then look out, you evil seltzer water cans!

quote:

Originally posted by AllenInWV:
So what I'm seeing is I'd be better off with a MOA/mil reticle, learning my preferred ammo's performance and doing the math.

You don't do the math -- the ballistics program does it for you. You just provide reasonably accurate data input, test the ballistics predictions with actual results at the range, then record the data in your preferred manner for future use.

Let's assume my data above is accurate for your rifle & load, and you're using an MOA scope. The pertinent data can be arranged in 3 columns -- distance to target, elevation requirements in MOA, and lateral drift in MOA for a 10mph crosswind. The possible data in 25 yard target distance increments, with a 50-yard zero:
yards __ MOA elevation __ MOA wind
75 __ 2.3 __ .8
100 __ 5.3 __ 1.0
125 __ 8.5 __ 1.3
150 __ 12.0 __ 1.5
175 __ 15.6 __ 1.7
200 __ 19.3 __ 2.0
MOA turret adjustments will likely be in 1/4 MOA increments, thus some rounding occurs.

The following is two different dope cards I used one day for training with a 308, at 6 steel targets between 414 and 765 yards. The second and third columns are MOA elevations and MOA windage, respectively.

The left card was for my normal 100-yard zero. The right card was for dialing 14.5 MOA of elevation for 587 yards, using the reticle for holdovers and holdunders for the other targets.

Note that I had a complete JBM ballistics printout for this rifle and load, for distances of 100 to 1000 yards, in increments of 10 yards. This on-rifle dope card was written with wet-erase pens, for that day's specific training.