1-4 scope vs 2-7, 3-9, 2.5-10 + red dot?

[stre-tch]

I know putting a red dot on the side (45*) with a magnified scope puts you into another class but my question is just about the performance. How well does this set up perform against a quality 1-4 from 0-400 yards? Speed and accuracy as well as ease of use between the two?

Thanks for satisfying my curiosity

[jimmcc]

I love my JPoint in a Burkett mount. Great for 50yds and under. The problem I have in Ohio is that I end up using it more than my primary 4x16 Leupold. That's why I just ordered a ZD Kdot. I will still have my JPoint on the side, I will just zero it for 20' and the Kdot at 200 yards. Should work around here.

[THM7]

I am also now using a Burkett mount with a Fastfire....ACOG TA-11 is my primary optic. Very easy to go from one to the other....but there are plenty of local matches where I have had my butt handed to me with guys using 1-4x. It is all what you practice with. But to answer your ques....yes it does make things easier going from far to close in targets, it only takes a split second to transition from one to the other.

[MarkCO]

You left out 1.5-6.

Field of view is a very important component of an optic. When you start getting to magnifications above 7 or so, you start to lose FOV to the point where that loss outweighs the magnification benefits. The 1-4s, from a necessity and cost standpoint tend to be what a lot of people use in TS, for a lot because they can't or won't afford a 1-6 for 3 or 4 times the cost. That 1X on the bottm is more important than the 6 or 7 at the top. A time aid has been the ScopeLever/Cat-tail/SwitchViews that allow quicker change in magnification on the 1-4s.

A scope with a 1.5 or 2 on the bottom end and a 6 to 8 on the top end plus a red dot gives you all the magnification that is beneficial for 3Gun. But, you get two settings at once with no need to move your hands. That should be faster for most people...if there is a fast close ot far or far to near transition. There are not a lot of stages that force far to near transitions, which is where the time gain would likely be the most. Near to far, the settle time mitigates to some degree the benefit.

Shooting with both eyes open for a right handed shooter, one might find that the red dot is a tad slower on right to left transitions since the scope is partially blocking the left eye, not so with a 1-4. Flip that transitioning in the opposite direction. In reality it is probably a wash.

Is there some benefit to the red dot mounted above the scope? Some, probably more of an individual preferance. If there some benefit to the red dot (for a right hand shooter) mounted on the left side? Oh yeah!

[Doug H.]

I agree with Mark. I would get something that you would use as a stand alone optic and then add the side dot. I run the Swaro 1-6 BRT with a C-More STS mounted on a Burkett side mount. I found that there were times when I was making a transition from far to near targets and then back to far that I didn't like having to change power on the scope. If I'm shooting a stage with all short range I set my scope for 1x and never use the side dot. On long range stages I set the scope for the power I plan to use and shoot the close stuff with the side dot. I have a scope power lever but I try to never change power during a stage, just one more thing for me to screw up.

Of the options you mentioned, I would probably go with the 2-7, plenty of power for our game and with my old eyes I like a little more power than the 1-4. At 6x the targets appear 50% larger than at 4x, its almost like cheating!

Doug

[stre-tch]

thanks for the education good thought guys

I started looking into FOV on the 1.5-X scopes and it seems that without jumping into glass for > $100.00 (Swaro 1.7-10 comes to mind) the max FOV is around 60'

Examples

Minox 1.5-8

Burris XTR 1.5-6

Leupold 1.5-5.

One thing I thought was interesting is Burris's new Mtac 1.5-6X30 has a FOV listed around 33' where the XTR is around 60' any idea why? 33' for the 1.5 was the lowest I found of any and I am hoping it is a typo as I think the MTAC 1.5-6 might prove as good (bang for your buck) as the MTAC 1-4 has. I think it has the same reticle as the 1-4 but I wonder if the center dot is still going to be around 2.4 MOA. Guess I better give them a call today

ETA: Just looked at the site and the 1-4 has a FOV on 4x of 32' that means that the 1.5-6x40 has 1' more FOV at 1.5x than the 1-4 at 4x......something doesn't look right to me maybe I have been too much

Edited February 20, 2012 by stre-tch

[michael1778]

This has been great information, so far. I'd appreciate any Brand and model recommendations to go along with the 'category' recommendations we have seen. For example, Leupold's line alone has a dizzying array of product families and so forth. Add in Vortex, Burris, etc........Makes my head spin!

I love to learn. Thank you all.

[StealthyBlagga]

Make sure you try before you buy. Scopes with higher magnification ranges tend to have a smaller exit pupil, which can be EXTREMELY unforgiving in terms of head position and eye relief, particularly on close-range hoser stages and in awkward shooting positions (e.g. off the weak shoulder). I find the Swaro 1-6x (exit pupil 9.6-4.0mm) feels like I'm looking down a toilet roll tube, especially at 1x. My 1-4x K-Dot (exit pupil 22mm-5.5mm) seems much more forgiving.

There is no such thing as a free lunch, so think carefully about the pros and cons of going to the higher magnification ranges.

Edited February 20, 2012 by StealthyBlagga

[Jim Norman]

Just a thought, doesn't having a scope and a dot place you into Open in most matches?

The exit pupil size, I had nearly forgotten about that, also eye relief. both are probably as important as an extra power of magnification.

I have a K-Dot and I am seriously thinking of going back to my Leupold 1-4. I'd really like the Meopta if it has a fine cross hair with a circle. It is bright and clear and has great forgiveness for head placement, but the dot is too freaking big for smaller targets at distance. Some of this has to do with old eyss I am sure. Maybe a lower power setting would have helped, but so would a smaller dot inside a circle.

My opinion and others here are far more knowledgeable than I.

[stre-tch]

Good points guys! Here is some info on a few scopes in the 1.5x range (I put the IOR just to show what happens when you leave the sub $1000.00 range). Too bad some of the scopes don't list the Exit pupil. Obviously glass quality is going to vary but here is a small table showing a sample of whats out there. Forgive the formatting issues tried to fix them

Name/Model_______________________Power______________FOV_________Exit Pupil________Price________________Reticle__________________Illuminated

Weaver

Kaspa

Tactical________________________1.5-6x32_________65.5/14.8_______21.3-5.3_______282.95 MSRP____________Tactical Ballistic X______Yes

Vortex

Diamondback_____________________1.75-5X32________68.3-23.1__________NA__________179.95 SWFA____________Dead Hold BDC_____________No

Simons

ProHunter_______________________1.5-5x32_________67-20____________18-6.4_________79.95 SWFA____________Diamond___________________No

Minox ZA5_______________________1.5-8x32_________59.6-11.8________24-4.5_________478.95________________Versa-Plex________________No

Meopta Meostar__________________1.5-6x42 RD______67-20____________NA_______________NA__________________4C________________________Yes

Leupold VX3_____________________1.5-5x20_________66.5-29__________NA____________599.95 SWFA____________Illuminated Duplex________Yes

__

Leupold VX3_____________________1.5-5x20_________66.5-29__________NA____________399.95 SWFA____________Duplex____________________No

Leatherwood

Buck Country

and

Professional____________________1.5-6x42________63.1-15.7_________8-6___________99.95 -144.95 SWFA_____2 Plex____________________No

IOR Tactical____________________1.5-8x26________89-22_____________17.5-3.5______1329.95 SWFA___________CQB_______________________Yes

Hawke Endurance_________________1.5-6x42________65-7______________NA____________329.95 SWFA____________Illuminated L4 Dot________Yes

Falcon Menace___________________1.5-5x30________73.1-23.0_________20-6__________244.95 SWFA____________LP20 Reticle Red/Green____Yes

Bushnell

Elite 6500______________________1.25-8__________60-9.7____________14-2.6________699.00 SWFA____________Fine Multi-x______________No

Bushnell Trophy_________________1.5-6x42________66-17.5___________27.5-7.2______239.95 SWFA____________Illuminated 4a____________Yes

Bushnell Trophy_________________1.5-6x44________66-17.5___________29.3-7.3______139.95 SWFA____________4a________________________No

Bushnell

Legend

Ultra HD________________________1.75-5x32_______49-17_____________18.2-6.4______249.00 SWFA____________DOA 200___________________No

Burris MTAC_____________________1.5-6x40________33-13_____________13-5__________398.95 SWFA____________Ballistic CQ______________Yes

Burris XTR______________________1.5-6x40________60-20_____________26-7__________798.95 SWFA____________Ballistic 7.62____________Yes

Alpen Apex______________________1.5-6x42________70-18_____________14-7__________298.95 Optics Planet___BDC_______________________Yes

Weaver

Super Slam______________________1.5-6x24________63.3-15.9_________13-4.1________491.95 Optics Planet___Ill. German #4____________Yes

[stre-tch]

Called Burris today to find out more on the 1.5-6 MTAC and unfortunately the lady on the phone was not able to help me with my question. All she could look was look up the spec sheet (same is on the internet) and repeat what I had read and told her.

So does anyone know of a better number to call or person to find out the real technical answers?

All I want to know is

1. Is the FOV for the 1.5-6 MTAC really only 33'-13'?

2. If it is only 33'-13' why so narrow a FOV and why does the XTR have such a great FOV?

Any help would be appreciated

[MarkCO]

I'll see what I can find out. Mine is on the way, but I have looked through them and while I will not state an absolute, I am pretty sure there is a typo there. Just called so I should get something at lest over the weekend.

[P.E. Kelley]

If you are looking for awesome specs!

Bests everything listed.

TECHNICAL DATA

MAGNIFICATION...... 1x or 4x

OBJECTIVE SIZE..... 32mm

FIELD OF VIEW @ 100 yards...144- 38 ft

EXIT PUPIL..... 32 - 8mm

EYE RELIEF.............. 3.5 in

SWFA $989 with rings.

IOR PitBull.

Patrick

Edited February 23, 2012 by P.E. Kelley

[stre-tch]

Wow P. Kelley I didn't realize the Pitbull was so good 144' is huge. How is the illumination?

MarkCo - Anyword from Burris?

Thanks

[Audifn]

My MTAC 1.5-6 will be here tomorrow so soon I'll know first hand, but when I played with this scope at SHOT, I didn't think it had a narrow field of view.

[Audifn]

My MTAC 1.5-6 will be here tomorrow so soon I'll know first hand, but when I played with this scope at SHOT, I didn't think it had a narrow field of view.

Got my MTAC 1.5-6 the other day and got it on the range yesterday.

Initial impressions are good. I put about 250 rounds through it at everything from 100 to 600 yards. The 6x obviously beats the 4x hands down in the ability to see the 500 and 600 yard targets.

The protected turrets are nice, but are a little large and when you switch to your red dot you can see a bit off the windage turret in the glass.

I really like the ballistic CQ reticle, but it can be a bit of a pain to find your holds if your ammo doesn't match up perfectly. I am shooting the Hornady 75gr Steel Match and at 600yrds the 600yrd mil dot wasn't even close. I have to hold well over the head of a full size ipsc target to get a center body hit. But thats not really a negative, just something I have to learn.

I will say that the stadia lines in my buddies 2.5-10 nightforce were much easier to use out at 500 and 600 yards.

All in all, very happy with the scope, and can't wait to get more range time with it at distance.

[stre-tch]

Audfin

Thanks for the update

How was the FOV?

Did it seem abnormally small?

[bushmeat]

Have the Burris XTR in 1-4 and also recently got the MTAC in 1.5-6. Seems to me like both scopes have similar FOV - not restrictive by any means. I like the reticle of the XTR better in that the center dot offers a more precise aiming point and, for quick shots, the horseshoe is convenient. Zeroed with my 69s, both reticles match up close on the ballistic drops out to 500 yards. The 6x does feel like cheating.

A further note, I initially thought about the Nikon 2-8 M-223 but looked through one at a gunshow and the FOV was certainly inferior to the Burrises.

[stre-tch]

Bushmeat - Thanks for the comparison how is the clarity compared to your XTR and where did you get it from?

[bushmeat]

Bushmeat - Thanks for the comparison how is the clarity compared to your XTR and where did you get it from?

No perceptible difference until you go to 300 and then the 6 power just kicks ass. You could also get the XTR in 1.5-6. About $200 more but a nicer reticle imo.

The MTAC has better illumination but I've only needed it a couple of times - unpainted steels in shadow. As for true 1X, I find that overrated. At most of the matches in our area, they throw a lot of tight shots even into the hoser stages, so I've found myself going to 1.5X or 2X to drop that last Texas Star plate behind the no-shoot @ 80 yards then have no trouble hosing the popper arrays.

We routinely shoot to 300 yards, with 500 yards max every now and then. And, no, we don't get the steels painted between stages. So, you can see why I like 6X and BDC.

[MarkCO]

Went from the XTR to the MTAC for the simpler, faster, less cluttered reticle...