IceCold4x4 Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 So just getting into the sport now, most of my rifle is built. Still trying to decide on an optic. What's y'alls stance on 1-4 vs 1-6 or 1-8? Just my personal thoughts say the more magnification the better for long distance. I'd like to be able to hit at 400 yards no problems, is a 1-4 really enough for that? Seems like alot of people are running the MTAC 1-4 as far a the "cheap" scope go. Then there is the crowd i see running the Razor HD II for a hefty price bump And then I just saw the bushnell 1-8 elite tactical i think at a local gun shop and was VERY impressed for what it was for 1800 bucks. .. . is the extra 2 power really worth the average almost 1k increase in price for a 1-6? and if so what's another say 500 for a 1-8? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onagoth Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 I would say 1) depends on your eyesight 2) depends on your budget I was using a 1-4x and I have excellent eyesight, but still I opted to goto a 1-6.5x and I have had no problems seeing and hitting 400y targets. 1-8 just is too pricey right now. I can't justify dropping 2k+ on a scope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCold4x4 Posted April 1, 2014 Author Share Posted April 1, 2014 with contacts my eyesight isn't that bad, finally fixed my astigmatism which oddly enough really helped my pistol shooting more than i thought, haven't spent much time behind glass to notice a big difference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCold4x4 Posted April 2, 2014 Author Share Posted April 2, 2014 and i'm not sure on budget yet, I can justify 1k i think if its worth it. I like the looks of the new primary arms 1-6 with the acss reticle but it's not daylight visible supposedly. Wish it was that would be a no brainer. I've had nice S&B scopes before but I bought a 3x9 bushnell ar optics and was surprised by how good the glass was. cheap scopes aren't nearly as bad as 10 or 15 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onagoth Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 If you were impressed with the 1-8 elite tactical, why not go with the 1-6.5? I'm very happy with mine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wannabe Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 I was in the same situation. Finally went with the Vortex 1x6 after trying others and not being satisfied. My confidence and long range ability made a huge leap forward with the Vortex. If at all possible to get one you will not regret the purchase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davsco Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 i finally gave in and stepped up from 1-4 to 1-6.5, now that they have come down in price a little. haven't shot a match with it yet but hoping it makes a decent difference. last match had obscured, unpainted and shaded targets out to 300 yds and 4x just wasn't cutting it. other than price and maybe a little more weight, not sure of any downsides to going with 1-8x and you certainly don't need to crank it all the way up and lose field of view if targets are close enough for lower magnification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCold4x4 Posted April 2, 2014 Author Share Posted April 2, 2014 (edited) If you were impressed with the 1-8 elite tactical, why not go with the 1-6.5? I'm very happy with mine wasn't aware that they made one. Going to do some research now. Is it daytime visible like the 1-8 was? Edited April 2, 2014 by IceCold4x4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthyBlagga Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 (edited) I can make hits at 500+ with a non-magnified Aimpoint 2MOA red dot, and my eyes are nearly 50 years old. Unless your local MD likes to play "hunt the target", magnification is overrated IMHO. Better to spend the extra $$$ on accessories and ammo, and a GOOD mount. Remember also that, in general, the higher the magnification the smaller the eye box, which can make some scopes frustrating to use. If you have everything else you will ever need for 3-Gun (reliable shotgun, fast caddy system, good pistol etc.), then maybe spending the extra on a premium high-magnification optic will bring value, but otherwise there are better places to spend the $$$. JMHO. Oh, and if your MD cannot be bothered to paint the targets and add a contrasting backer, have stern words with him or offer to paint for him so he is shamed into doing the right thing. We should not have to be buying multi-thousand dollar optics because of lazy stage construction. Edited April 2, 2014 by StealthyBlagga Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCold4x4 Posted April 2, 2014 Author Share Posted April 2, 2014 I can make hits at 500+ with a non-magnified Aimpoint 2MOA red dot, and my eyes are nearly 50 years old. Unless your local MD likes to play "hunt the target", magnification is overrated IMHO. Better to spend the extra $$$ on accessories and ammo, and a GOOD mount. Remember also that, in general, the higher the magnification the smaller the eye box, which can make some scopes frustrating to use. If you have everything else you will ever need for 3-Gun (reliable shotgun, fast caddy system, good pistol etc.), then maybe spending the extra on a premium high-magnification optic will bring value, but otherwise there are better places to spend the $$$. JMHO. Oh, and if your MD cannot be bothered to paint the targets and add a contrasting backer, have stern words with him or offer to paint for him so he is shamed into doing the right thing. We should not have to be buying multi-thousand dollar optics because of lazy stage construction. ya my eyesight just isn't that good. I whine using a 9 power scope on our .22 200 yard sniper matches. (it works but 12 would really help). So I dunno. But for about 1k I'm def looking into the bushnell 1-6.5. Thanks Onagoth for bringing it to my attention. which reticle did you go with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neomet Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Just a short tale from a guy closing in on 60 with old eyes, colorblind, and 4 retinal surgeries. Superstition Mountain was coming up and I was spending more time comparing 1-6 and 1-7 scopes than I am willing to admit, certain that the shots at 300 and beyond could not be done with my MTAC 1-4. Should I spend $800 for this scope or $1200 for that scope? Thank God the wife is patient beyond words. I ended up deciding to just shoot what I had and got two cases of premium ammo. Went to the range and zeroed it using a sled at 200Y, verified my zeros all the way in to 100 and shot a bunch at 200 and 300Y plates. Rolled into Superstition and took one extra shot at the targets at 380Y and that was because I pulled the shot. I don't think a 6 or 8 or 12X would have helped me one bit. I was honestly shocked at what the 4X could do on all the long range stuff. That being said Stealthy's point above is spot on. Because of the contrasting backdrop I could see the targets. I have shot other matches where I simply could not find the target at 200Y because it was unpainted steel nicely camouflaged into the background. Higher magnification may help you there if you can't stop the MD from turning the stage into a "Wheres Waldo" exercise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onagoth Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 If you were impressed with the 1-8 elite tactical, why not go with the 1-6.5? I'm very happy with mine wasn't aware that they made one. Going to do some research now. Is it daytime visible like the 1-8 was? Not to the same extent as a swaro....but honestly, I never use the illumination unless there is a dark or shaded stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travtastik Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 I think it comes down to practice and knowing your equipment and how to shoot. Last year at the SE3GC my buddy kept telling me how I was screwing myself using a 1-4 when everyone has 1-6's now. I shot the long range stage faster then any of friends that were using the 1-6's. I keep telling myself that I need a 1-6 but I have yet to shoot a stage that I walked away saying that I would have done better if I had one. A match I was at last year I had a guy in my squad that had a JP rifle with a Swarovski scope and every high end bell and whistle you would ever want. He couldn't hit steel at 100yards with. Another guy had a palmetto armory kit gun with a scope from Walmart he had about $600 total in the rifle and he was the stage winner for a stage with 11 shots from 300-500 yards. You spend all the money you want buying the best stuff but you still have to put in work to get the hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onagoth Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 (edited) ...I keep telling myself that I need a... . I suffer from this all the time....I think a lot of 3 gunners do. A little devil on the shoulder that is constantly whispering "you'd have done better if you had this" Sometimes its true, many times its not. Edited April 2, 2014 by Onagoth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Re-read posts 9, 11 and 13. I too had an extra shot on the 375 target, but it had nothing to do with magnification. I saw those same targets hit one for one by guys with EOTechs and Prismatics! I started 3Gun with a 3-9, then 2-7, then 1.5 to 6 and now shoot a 1-4. My scores have been consistently improving. I will ABSOLUTELY guarantee that of two shooters starting 3Gun, one who buys a 1-4MTAC and some practice ammo and practices will place much higher than the guy who spends $1K plus on an optic. Just not necessary for the game. Shooting is still about fundamentals. Proper technique will overcome better gear almost every time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccoker Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 (edited) I will take better glass and a good reticle over magnification every day of the week. I am running a Steiner 1-5 and absolutely love it Edited April 2, 2014 by ccoker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assaulter Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 The field of view and eye relief are much more important than magnification. The vast majority of your rifle targets are less then 100 yards and the ability to pick them up quickly and engage them will save you more time than having a long range target appear a little larger but having to search for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccoker Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Definitely having an optic that is "easy to get behind" with a very forgiving eyebox helps a lot for getting on targets fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPeel Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 I used a Burris xtr 1-4 last year and it was a good scope. Went to the Bushnell 1-6.5 for this year and it is a major step up in optical clarity. The extra magnification helps some but it's not near as important as the improvement in the glass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPeel Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 Definitely having an optic that is "easy to get behind" with a very forgiving eyebox helps a lot for getting on targets fast. ^^^^^^ this too ^^^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskapopo Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 Magnification is not over rated. Sure you can hit large man sized targets at 500 yards with an Aimpoint. Try hitting a MGM auto popper with a 4 moa Aimpoint at 100 yards. Not as easy. Can be done but not easy or fast. How much magnification you need depends on the size of he targets your shooting and the distance. Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.E. Kelley Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 I will take better glass and a good reticle over magnification every day of the week. I am running a Steiner 1-5 and absolutely love it What he^^^ said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjb45 Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 I am really a 3G novice-RM3G and SMM3G. I opted for a SWARO because of the clarity of the glass and FOV. The scope is better than me. I am over 60 with 200/100 eyesight corrected for mono vision. Eye relief and field of view are critical. That is what made the SWARO 1-6 so popular that people were popping down $2300. I went with the 1.7-10X. I had to do it again I would go to the 2-12x version. JJ hides targets in the shadow of trees, you need the glass to see them. The FOV at 1.7 is more than most 1 or 2X scopes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jadeslade Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 I will take better glass and a good reticle over magnification every day of the week. I am running a Steiner 1-5 and absolutely love it What he^^^ said. I love it when Pat talks hip hop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncledoc Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 After reading this topic, I think I will just buy more ammo instead of a fancy scope. I am in the practice makes perfect camp even though my vision is not great! Thanks to the season responses...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now