Why don't you have best value optic yet?

I literally own that scooe

>>30618899
Would this be a good choice for a 23" VEPR in 54r? I'm looking at PSOP scopes, but I don't know shit about glass, and don't want to fuck this purchase up.

>>30619005
leatherwood CMR is sexual chocolate comrade

>>30618899
I go for performance over value

After much reading, I got their Razor gen 2 model.

I'd love to know how it compares to other 1-6xs, but it turns out SWFA doesn't mark which inventory is on backorder, so here I sit, twidling my thumbs.

Because I have the Primary Arms 1-6x with ACSS

File: image.jpg (350KB, 959x776px) Image search: [Google]

350KB, 959x776px

Because its objectively inferior to what I already have.

Anybody have experience with their 2.5-7x scope?
I've never been a fan of 1x scopes but that seems like a good range of variable power.

>>30621616
unless you want a variable

>>30621532
Considering a CMR4. Any experience?

>>30621645

Nobody needs a variable. Even Jerry Miculek hasn't a fucking clue and would improve his times if he switched.

>>30621675
Where did I say need?

>>30621610
cheaper and better reticle for the same scope

>>30618899
Because I'm a glass snob and elitist.


USO, S&B, Kahles, Steiner, Tangent Theta or bust

>>30621632
I have their 2-7 viper. Pretty decent. Nothing fancy.

>>30618899
Because I own the best performance optics.

1 x Nightforce ATACR F1
1 x S&B PMII
1 x Tangent Theta

Why don't you own any Gucci™ optics?

>>30621702
What's the smallest and most lightweight optic you can get that isn't a piece of shit?

Needs to have magnification of at least 2-6x

>>30621702
bitch take USO off that list right now.

And replace it with MARCH.

faggit do it now.

>>30621732
One of the March 1-8 FFPs. Expect to spend about 2400.

>>30621702
uso is overrated as fuck though. Literally worse han razor hd.

>>30621681

I was trying to use extreme sarcasm to basically agree with your initial post. I apologize for it not working.

>>30621749
No
>>30621732
I doubt it's the most lightweight, but in the range you want I would get the Nightforce NXS 2.5-10x42
http://nightforceoptics.com/nxs/2-5-10x42

>>30621771
DO you own any USO or Vortex Razor products?

>>30621716
Nightforce BEAST owner and Elcan SpectreDR nut.

I also own some old Unertl target scopes if that trips your trigger

>>30621807
Yeah, have the 5-25 Razor HD gen2.

And I've not owned but have used a USO 5-25.

The Razor is lighter and had more positive turret clicks and a less retarded reticle. As well as costing less.

Glass quality was close. The Razor had less fish eye, the USO had slightly better color.

>>30621831
> SpectreDR

How do you like the fact that you can't use the scope at 1x because the eye relief is so unforgiving?

>Unertl
dude, these are antiques now. They're quite collectable. Just like the old PSO-1s and the Mosin PUs.

You'll have to try harder to trigger me.

File: VortexViper04.jpg (66KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 1000x667px

I have the better Vortex PSL

File: elcan quallity.webm (1MB, 1000x1800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x1800px

>>30621831
>Elcan.....

I want an ior 40mm scope.

Anyone have experience with the Sparc AR? Looking for a budget red dot that will play nicely with magnification in the future. Seems like a good buy at $200 and I haven't seen a negative review yet...

That's not a PA ACSS.

For my precision ar i have a swfa 3-15.

For my nm i have a 4x acog.

For my 6.5 creedmoor i really want a tantheta or an ior 40mm

File: Remington 700 SPS - SWFA SS 10x42.jpg (456KB, 2000x567px) Image search: [Google]

456KB, 2000x567px

>>30618899
Sorry, my SWFA begs to differ.

Different application though.

File: 187.jpg (488KB, 1232x816px) Image search: [Google]

488KB, 1232x816px

Actually just yesterday I picked one up

>>30623152
>SWFA
Ma nigga. Their 3-9x42 is the tits. My dad gave me shit about spending that much on a scope until he looked through it.

>>30623232
your dad gave you shit for spending 600 bucks on a scope?

Anon, it's time to put him in a home.

>>30623930
Quote after I bought my PTR, "I'd never spend over a thousand on a rifle"
>The only guns he's bought since the 90s were several ARs from PSA
>He owns a fucking Browning BAR safari, BLR, and a fucking Benelli SBE II (never fired)
I'm pretty sure he just doesn't know what inflation is.

>>30623954
time to hit your daddy over the head with some fucking BLS data.

File: internet1348241906082.jpg (107KB, 770x730px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 770x730px

>>30621545
>>30621702
>>30621716
>>30621793
>>30621831
>>30621845
And yet you don't post pictures on an image board.

How odd.

One might come to the conclusion that none of you own any of that equipment.

File: IMG_20160701_170127487.jpg (590KB, 1989x760px) Image search: [Google]

590KB, 1989x760px

>>30618899

Reporting in

>>30624129
be real son, how butthurt are you that you're too poor to afford top tier optics?

it's ok, this is a safe place.

>>30624204
how does him not owning anything relate in any way to you also not owning anything? id put him a cut above because at least hes not lying about it like a pathetic beta

File: museum quality mags.jpg (1MB, 1900x1267px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1900x1267px

Reticle's too thick IMO. Otherwise its a solid poorfag placeholder.

>>30618899
Because I need turrets?

>>30618899
Because they don't hold zero, their turrets aren't repeatable.

The #1 requirement of an optic for me is to hold zero and have repeatable adjustments. Without that they are worthless to me.*

* red dots I tend to need only hold zero as I don't dial them after zeroing.

>>30624345
>Because they don't hold zero
[citation needed]
>their turrets aren't repeatable
[citation needed]

>>30624304
>to you also not owning anything
lololol

I'm
>>30621716

get fucking real.

File: babeywcan.jpg (2MB, 1439x1731px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1439x1731px

>>30618899
Strike Eagle massarace reporting in

File: Maten 308.jpg (538KB, 3214x1568px) Image search: [Google]

538KB, 3214x1568px

>>30624129

File: dta.jpg (435KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 1600x1200px

>>30624129
Faggot

>>30624633
People who don't shoot always need someone else to tell them how gear performs.

All kinds of gear works well when sitting on a shelf. I do enough to sort the good from the bad, if you don't I'm sure Vortex will work just fine.

>>30624912
>lying on the internet

>>30624934
Facts trouble many.

The only people who think Vortex is great, is people who don't shoot.

See http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/9472657/all/Vortex_Scopes

Or search all posts by formidilosus on that forum. I don't feel like repeating it here.

>>30624974
>one tiny opinion piece on an autism forum
That's cute.

>>30624911
ok, that is pretty GUCCI.

>>30624991
>marketing copy from the manufacturer

Ask how I know you don't shoot.

I'm the poster, you idiot. I do this shooting stuff for a living.

File: P1013024.jpg (637KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

637KB, 1600x1200px

>2016
>still not using TruGlo airsoft optics on your real weapons.

>>30624974
actually the Razor gen2s are very good performers. Very popular in the PRS circuit.

Obviously, as someone who owns an S&B PMII, an ATACR, and a custom Tangent Theta (plus a March 1-8 on order), I'll never admit that IRL.

File: P1010087.jpg (430KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 1024x768px

>2016
>Not putting full size Aimpoints on your pistols.

File: IMG_20160710_113732417.jpg (3MB, 4160x2340px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4160x2340px

>>30624129
Faggot

File: PB142960.jpg (861KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

861KB, 1600x1200px

>2016
>Not having an AccuPoint on an RFB.

>>30625046
Razor Gen 2s are the only Vortex optics that have made it through any of our classes.

>>30625035
I don't receive enough welfare to qualify for that level of equipment.

File: 1430100100257.jpg (102KB, 640x800px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 640x800px

>>30625065
>1" tube on a gun held together by wood screws?

File: image.jpg (71KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 800x533px

>>30621716
How about an optic of which only about a dozen made it to North America, and will never be exported again? How's that for Gucci?

File: no just no.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>30624904
>>30624911
>>30625064
>posting someone else's pictures after the fact
You have no shame. I can't even wrap my head around how sheltered and diseased you must be to not just think you could get away with trying that, but also think it's right and just.

Do you just hang around in airsoft forums all day posting other peoples pictures to a cacophony of 12 year olds' 'wows?' You need to trick gullible children in order to inflate your bottomed-out sense of self worth because you can't get it by working hard and earning it yourself.

You're far worse than the other ones I quoted, because they stopped when caught at the first lie. You are the absolute most deplorable level of scumbag garbage human. I pity that your life is so catastrophically empty of true relationships that you seek attention this way from anonymous strangers.

This is the realest thing anyone has ever told you: Find a therapist immediately.

>>30625231
rare doesnt mean good

File: IMG_20160710_113710543.jpg (3MB, 4160x2340px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4160x2340px

>>30625275
>bunkposting.
But that SCAR is mine

>>30625079

Didn't know NVIDIA made RFB's

File: kong-safestix.jpg (145KB, 790x1422px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 790x1422px

>>30625322
>like AMD would make one better

>>30625283
Thankfully they actually are pretty damn good optics. Easily on par with any standard optic issued in the West. Source: I handled one at a local gun show, and I'm buying one at the end of the month.

>>30625322
>implying radeon could possibly do better
I bet you have AMD hardware in your computer right now

File: 1462847883937.jpg (6KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 250x250px

>>30625335
>>30625363

>Nvidia
>2016

>>30625275
poverty has made this faggit delirious.

>>30625300

don't use also have a Glock model 40? I think I remember you posting your rifle before with one next to it

>>30625231
dat....is pretty GUCCI.

Never even heard of it. Gimme some info, senpai.

File: IMG_20160322_091216882.jpg (3MB, 4160x2340px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4160x2340px

>>30625400

>>30625390
SNAP card ran out before the middle of the month. Whats a poor anon to do?!?

>>30625429
Senpai, take that Vortex off the G40. You shame your famiri.

You know who this is.

>>30625441
get a job and not shitpost on 4chan.

Shitposting is a privilege reserved for 6 figa niggas with no social life (like me).

>>30623954
What do you have on your PTR? I've heard that a lot of optics have trouble holding zero due to its recoil and am thinking about just throwing a red dot on there to avoid the trouble.

>>30621845
That's really interesting given that the Razor Gen II is 4.5-27. You're either lying or don't even know your own optic. Either way it's pathetic.

>>30625453
But do I get an RMR09?
Wait for unity to release g40 adapter plates and put an aimpoint on it?

>>30621954
Never get an IOR scope. For their price, they're not even close to competitive.

>>30625511
>let alone the weight

File: PTR Camo Furniture.jpg (1MB, 2136x1424px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2136x1424px

Close enough, love my crossfire.

File: 1456665261255.jpg (116KB, 401x333px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 401x333px

>>30621616
>That paint job

How exactly did you do that/any tips on painting?

>>30624974
Vortex Gen II are by far the most popular scopes in the PRS. They don't use bad equipment. Also Vortex is an extremely popular brand on other forums such as Sniper's Hide. Why does Vortex work for them?

>>30625558
Good price to performance.
PRS fags dont care that the scopes weight three fucking pounds

>>30625498
Honestly, try a Delta Point Pro.

I use the laser a lot more than my RMR.

>>30625568
Weight was never brought up. If you want less weight then go with the AMG. It seemed to be implied that they lacked repeatable turret adjustments and return to zero. That seems like it'd be a HUGE issue for PRS guys given the amount of dialing they do.

File: image.jpg (92KB, 670x462px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 670x462px

>>30625408
YMA-97-600
Standard Chinese optic for the QBZ platform. There are 5.8 and 5.56 variants (for the QBZ-95 and QBZ-97, respectively). Day/Low light (Illuminated reticle), quick-release mount, and holds zero when removed to allow the user to clean the rifle without re-zeroing. Glass is pretty good. Think of it like a small Chink ACOG.

Info is scarce, best estimates put the amount imported at about a dozen, since they only occasionally came in with the "Gen 1" Type 97, and Norinco has flat-out said "no more". The importer is defunct, and almost nothing exists online about them. The Chinese are being secretive about them, like with that stupid new 5.8x42 round, and anyone who does have one up here tends to rarely mention them at all.

>>30625569
Ill consider it.
Picking up a G34 this weekend. Its getting a six second mount, T2, x400, murder bucket holster, etc.

>>30625360
>only a dozen made it to NA
>handled two like it's no big deal
k

>>30625377
AMD's only quality is poorfags can afford it.

>>30625721

t. 3.5gb owner

>>30625688
I've handled one, and only ever seen one. I asked around, though, and convinced someone with one to sell it after much prodding, since he needs the money. He'll be up here at the end of the month, and then that'll be the second.

File: Happy-Wife.jpg (80KB, 339x1000px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 339x1000px

>>30625746
brutal

File: 2016-07-10 07.17.44.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>30625275
Damn nigga, why you gotta be so salty?

>>30625543
You don't have a Walmart that sells mesh laundry bags near you?

>>30626038
I mean more like how did you do your layers? Like which order for which color?

>>30625671
Thats very interesting

>>30625866
Because salt is the only flavor he can afford on his meager income.

File: image.jpg (275KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 1536x2048px

>>30625671
Whoops, it should be "95".
>From the manual.

No one has a leupold
Kek

Viper pst 2.5-10 on my mcx works great.

File: Porn.jpg (74KB, 550x592px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 550x592px

>>30629226
Thats because people are posting cheap optics and nice optics in this thread.
Not that gulf of in between. They arent really cheap, they arent really nice.

Well I guess Mk8 is nice

>>30625606
Is the scope in OP's picture a Gen II Razor?

You people are impossibly dumb.

>>30629226
Leupolds suck in general.

File: 1339272424769.jpg (33KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 600x400px

>>30629701
They werent talking about garbage optics like OP.
You seem to poor to pay attention

>>30629712
Who is 'they'?

OP posted a 1-6x24 Strike Eagle. I wrote that it doesn't hold zero, doesn't have repeatable turrets, doesn't have accurate turrets.

Someone wrote that Gen II Razors hold zero. I replied that those are the only Vortex models that have even performed in our classes.

Someone suggested a lotta PRS guys shoot Gen II Razors, which means they must be reliable, as if that introduced new information to the discussion.

So Vortex selling a single line of scopes that perform, doesn't mean every other Vortex model doesn't suck including the one in OP's picture. In every imaginable application, more can be had for less, but Vortex has done a great job marketing to people who hardly ever shoot, twist turrets, etc.

>>30629763
"they" being the ones talking about actually good optics, including the razor lineup.

Your right about the entirety of the rest of their lineup being garbage. Had one of the PST line myself for about two months before I could find a trade that I was interested in.

>>30626263
>>30626263
Oh I wasn't the guy that painted that rifle, I thought you were talking about the texture. But from what I can see:

Always start with your lightest color, since the rifle will only get darker in color the more you paint.

It looks like that guy didn't even have a base layer since it looks like black from the rifle in some spots so he probably just used a dark green first and then a dark brown and painted in a slanted motion like most rifle rattle can jobs.

>>30618899
Because I have a Viper PST with a better reticle.

While we're talking optics, could someone recommend me a 3-9x or 2.5-10 in the $300-500 range? It would be for a .308

>>30624974
>>30629701
You blanket labeled their brand as being terrible with inaccurate turret adjustments. People called you out and you copped out by linking a single topic from some fudd site.

Was thinking of getting a Leupold Mark AR 1-4. Is the Vortex better/worse?

File: image.png (276KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 700x700px

>>30625671
Now isn't that neat.

File: 1465862125796.gif (2MB, 300x228px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x228px

>>30624191
>Mil Spec +
I'm fuckin jello.

Ausfag. So even budget scopes can be inaccsessibly expensive if they have the slightest tactical connotation. I'm looking to get a vortex viper pst 6-24 ffp for my .308 but the cheapest I can find one is $1300 dollarydoos

>>30630957
>$1000 burger bucks
Yeah, that's what they go for.

>>30618899

I actually just got to look through one of those yesterday, a guy at the range had it. And I was very surprised at how clear the picture through the scope was and the illuminated reticle was nice.

>>30630618
Check SWFA

>>30630699
Every single scope they offer, apart from the Gen II Razors, sucks. They don't hold zero, they don't have accurate turrets, and their turrets are not repeatable.

This is simple fact, revealed to all who shoot and twist turrets doing it. I linked to the site because I wrote plenty on this specific topic there that I don't care to rewrite here. If it makes you feel better to label it a fudd site, it doesn't matter to me, but there is more experience with a wider variety of gear there than here by a thousandfold.

There or here though, threatening someone's brand loyalty will bring out the whiners.

The shortcoming of North American hunters and shooters is that most are perfectly okay with putting a $300 scope on a $3000 gun. Anyone who is experienced with shooting would much rather have a $3000 scope and $300 gun. Especially for long distance.

File: laughingwhores.jpg (77KB, 600x536px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 600x536px

>>30619005
>he got the 23"
dont put a poorfag scope on it, btw. mine ate my $40 wallmart scope.

As a seasoned shooter that only owns Burris and Vortex, I can say that USO and Nightforce are nothing special and in some regards subpar. The one I handled was clunky and heavy and the glass wasnt even that clear.

>>30631082
Killswitch on SH found the Razor 5-20 tracking perfectly fine too. He uses larger sample sizes of up to 20 scopes for each test. You're an idiot if you don't think all scope companies don't have issues with perfect tracking. You won't believe me because you're a frequent poster on a forum mostly geared toward hunting. And why would hunters need to care about tracking? Saying a site has more experience with optics than /k/ is a gimme, it doesn't mean anything. I'll link you the KSE thread and you can read about a variety of $2000+ optics with tracking issues.

http://www.scout.com/military/snipers-hide/forums/5511-rifle-scopes/13865031-killswitch-s-scope-tracking-tests

Then if you still believe you're right that nothing from Vortex tracks except a single scope, post a topic in the riflescope section about it.

>>30630957

Optics are just insane. I find it crazy to spend more on an accessory than what I spent on the gun I'm putting it on. You can always check out Nikon scopes. They have some cheaper offerings and I've had one for six years and it's never lost zero.

>>30631193
It depends what your rifle's purpose is. If it's a hunting rifle that you won't shoot past 200, you don't need much out of a scope. For distances where you'll be dialing for elevation and possibly holding for wind, you start to need something more.

Is it worth it to buy a rifle scope just for looking at birds n' shit?

I used to have a monocular as a kid, but lost it. I want to replace it, but these things are expensive. Rifle scopes are sometimes more competitively priced. Should I just get a 4x or 8x scope, or is it more worth it to get a proper "scout visor" or whatever the fuck airsofters call them now?

realtalk I'm only intending to use it to look at bird cloaca and spy on bar patrons across the street

>>30631221
Get a pair of binoculars for that you degenerate.

>>30631063
Their 1-4 looks pretty decent. Any clue how their mounts are?

Also if I was willing to spend another $200 is there anything different I should be looking at?

This is going to be for a .308 that I'll be shooting around 800m max with most shooting being around 300m.

>>30631254
I dislike binos because one eye always gets a piece of sand or some shit in a thread and never focuses properly again, and the fancy "auto-focusing" binos on the market never work right and give me a big headache after a few minutes of use, let alone hours.

I want a monocular because I basically don't have to maintain it at all.

I'd also rather want one with a truly ridiculous magnification because on top of looking at bird pussy and people's laptops, I'm in the navy and want one for when I'm on lookout duty. They don't issue binos and the ones that belong to the ship always suck and have focusing problems and dirty lenses and loose threads and shit.

>>30631268
All of my knowledge of them is secondhand, so take it with a grain of salt. For what you're shooting SWFA should be more than enough and leave you some extra cash for ammo. I don't know about their mounts but you can always buy another one

A scope is a scope. Anyone who yammers on about "clear glass" is a fucking moron. All you need is something that is durable and decent enough to hold a zero.


Clear glass is only a priority when it comes to binoculars and spotting scopes, because those are the tools you use to locate shit. You will never find anything by only looking through your rifle scope.

ITT; People who don't know what they're talking about

>>30631297
Sounds like you'd want a spotting scope then, again not a riflescope.

>>30631342
>a scope is a scope
That's not even remotely accurate. You clearly don't know anything about optics. I'll list a few differences between scopes.

>Magnification
>Parallax adjustment
>Tube diameter and its effect on the amount of elevation/windage travel available
>Angular units per turn of the turret (MIL or MOA)
>Reticle choice and accuracy of reticle subtensions
>First focal plane vs second focal plane
>Illumination
>"Glass" quality. Which means clarity, chromatic aberration, distortion as you get farther from the optical center, etc.
>Exit pupil diameter which effects how easy it is to get behind the scope
>Zero stop, which you can set so you don't lose track of what turret turn you're on.

And that's just to name some of the differences between good optics and bad optics. There are many more.

>>30631349
Well, I was wondering if I could cheap out by buying a rifle scope with equivalent magnification but an inexplicably lower price, and thus if I should look in the rifle scope sections of catalogues instead of the spotting/scout scope section.

>>30631342
i would agree if were only talking about short range shooting. theres no need to spend hundreds if youre only shooting 200 yards but once you get into precision shooting, mechanical consistency becomes very important.

>>30618899
Because I have a Viper 1-4.

And a Tango4 3-12.

>>30631414
theres no reason an el cheapo rifle scope wont work for bird watching if you dont mind looking like an autist. i imagine a spotting scope would work better, though.

>>30621732
Not the smallest, but the lightest variables are
Weaver 1-3x (8.5oz)
Leupold VX-3i 1.5-5x if you need illumination (9.3oz)
Leupold VX-2 1-4x (8.2oz), or IER if you need a scout scope (9.3oz), or ultralight 2-7x (8.5oz)

I'm sure there's probably a lighter fixed mag option out there, maybe an air rifle/22 scope or something.

I wish more manufacturers would cater to the lightweight hunting market. From what I've seen, most of these scopes have pretty meh optics in terms of flatness/distortion, which is pretty important on low mag variables. The lightest scopes that I consider passable in this area are probably the Trijicon Accupoint 1-4x and the Leupold VX-6 1-6x, both substantially more expensive and heavier than these.

>>30631478
bird watchers are all autists anyway, I don't mind looking weird while specifically engaging in an autistic hobby

>i imagine a spotting scope would work better,
I know literally nothing of rifle optics. Can a rifle scope be focused, or is it always set at one focal distance/point? what i'm really asking is

>can two rifle scopes on a door hinge and my own steady hand replace a pair of binos

>>30631549
...... No.

>>30631583
But, if you decide to try, please post pics. I need the picture of two rifle scopes mounted to a door hinge for uh... reasons

>>30631640
I'd love to but I'm really jewish so even if i were rich as fucc (which I ain't) I wouldn't bother without extensive market research into proving that two rifle scopes and a door hinge are totally the most cost effective binos I could get

even knowing that I want a monocular and not binos

>>30631297
i dont even know what to say to this

>>30632035
I said it to a guy at a mallninja crap store (they mostly sold "survival gear", camo clothes, gimmick knives, and of course lots of airsoft guns/supplies and a couple of genuine overpriced air rifles) and I think I really did kill the clerk on the inside a little when I explained why I wanted a monocular specifically

but honestly, I've never used a pair of binos that didn't give me a headache. I had a monocular with a kid and was fine unscrewing it all and cleaning it, but I feel proper binos will just never ever come to a good enough focus not to make my eyes hurt. and who needs depth perception when you're either looking out over the flat expanse of the ocean, or are looking at trees within normal visual range to spot bird pussy

>>30621913

you bought a knockoff.

So, here is a noob optics question. Is a scout setup on a AR pattern rifle a thing? Everyplace I see reference to scout scope setups I see larger calibers mentioned. Am I missing something?

>>30632833
What does "scout setup" mean?

>>30632833
Why would you ever want a forward mounted scope on an ar15? Seeing as how that is what you mean to type since 5.56 cannot be used in a scout rifle.

File: IMG_2753-1024x768.jpg (230KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1024x768px

>>30632911
Scope mounted further forward. Scopes designed with more eye relief to use this mounting position. These are low magnification scopes to be shot with both eyes open.

I just saw this while browsing scopes and thought I bet /k/ knows about semi-retarded ideas..

>>30632959
www.gunnuts.net/2015/12/29/scout-scope-on-an-ar15-why-not/

Google answers my question. In short 'you can, but why?'

Themoreyouknow.wav

>>30632959

File: finn.jpg (44KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 512x512px

>>30633004
>scope mount touching two uneven rails

>>30633004
That image is a terrible example
Your optics should always be mounted to the reciever exclusively.

>>30633271
Agree it is terrible, but it was what Google images gave me. Sorry I should have put a trigger warning up.
>>30633242
Let's agree that any attempt at this would not bridge the gap.

Better yet, let's just agree it isn't a good idea in a world where red dots exist (or possibly any world)

File: 20160715_154705.jpg (838KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

838KB, 2048x1152px

>>30618899

But I do. I still need to zero it though.

>>30633121
You misunderstood, 5.56x45 cannot be used in a scout rifle, it doesn't fit the incredibly arbitrary definition. Also an acog does the job better.

File: thatword.png (13KB, 619x285px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 619x285px

>>30633761
>arbitrary
I don't think it means what you think it means.

>>30631268
Here again.

I've been looking around at other 1-4s does anybody know how the Vortex Viper PST compares? I can get it for a bit cheaper than the SWFA.

Or for $200 more I could pick up a Trijicon accupower.

Any opinions?

File: babbysfirst3.jpg (4MB, 4128x2322px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4128x2322px

strike eagle master race reportin

>>30634155
AccuPower isn't a very competitive scope. Honestly, in your price range, just buy a Vortex, which gives you a good warranty at least.

>>30621675
How well does the ACOG work at ranges below 50m?

For $30 this cannot be beat for plinking. My first time shooter friends hit 6" steel with my carbine with ease using this thing.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B005UGIPUQ/ref=sxl1?ie=UTF8&qid=1468678800&sr=1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65

>>30642734

Poorly enough that people put a RDS on top of it for just that purpose.

The post you replied to was using sarcasm to (poorly) highlight that a lot of sport shooters opt for variables for the reason you pointed out.