Mueller Cqb Optic Review

[smokshwn]

Recently there was a post discussing a new CQB/ 3 Gun optic to be offered from Mueller Optics. I made contact with the original poster and discussed some of the reticle ideas and specs for the scope. Through these discussions I agreed to test and review one of the preproduction models. To give some background here is this earlier reviewAR15.com Review. I will reference it in my review a few times.

The target price for this scope should be in the $300 range give or take. The idea was to offer an optic that would perform similarly to the IOR, USO SN 4, Trijicon, etc. at a more reasonable price point. In the early discussion it was decided that a combination reticle was necessary. The latest version of the reticle is in the attached pics.

The technical specs of the scope are in the above AR15.com post. In my initial testing I did not find anything to contradict those specs. For those wondering, the reticle is supposed to be in the first focal plane which will allow for ranging on any power setting.

The scope I was sent was not in its final configuration with respect to the reticle design and a few minor details. The housing and tube is as it will be in production with the exception of an index knob on the power ring to assist in its operation. Also there has been recommendations to attempt a reduction in the power ring travel. The scope I was sent had a basic duplex reticle with a 1MOA illuminated center dot. Again you can see the proposed reticle in the attached pics.

So first things first. I am no optics expert but I have looked and shot through some very expensive pieces of optics, I also regularly shoot 3 gun through an EO Tech. The glass in this scope is very clear and I had no troubles getting the scoped focused for my eyes. The resolution and color separation seemed to be very impressive as well. I do have a US Optics scope on my MOR and this scope is definitely not in that class, however it is exceptionally better than the Tasco, Simmons et al crowd. I would say for comparison sake that the optics would rank within the realm of Nikon, Bushnell 4200 series that I have looked through.

I mounted the scope in a set of Weaver See Through rings and for me it was the perfect height on the AR. I was able to get a very solid cheek weld and with the rings in the forward most part of the flat top (see pics) eye relief was dead on as well. I put my nose on the charging handle as reference for my cheek weld. For those who sit a little farther back there is plenty of room to move the scope rearward. I did notice that if you move the scope to the rear you may need a tactical latch for your charging handle in order to easily operate the handle.

I sighted the scope in at 100 yds. mainly because the range I used only has one rifle range. It only took 4 groups to get it dialed. Windage and elevation come from traditional adjustment knobs and adjust POI 1/4" @ 100 yds. I agree with the thought that target knobs are unnecessary on this scope, however I would like to see better feel and operation from the elevation and windage adjustments. They worked fine but they were a little coarse for the intended price range. I shot one box test and the adjustments tracked fairly well, only requiring a click or two at each corner to bring the group to "dead on". Be advised this could easily be accounted for my own lack of skill and patience when shooting groups.

I then proceeded to shoot several groups with the dot both on and off. The groups were fine, but the illumination does need to get at least 25% brighter. I know there is a push for Night Vision capability, however my personal preference for 3gun use would be that the night vision settings be used to add brightness to the upper end of the scale vs. below the visible spectrum. Having been shooting the EO Tech for two years now I love the 1 MOA dot for precision work, with the outer ring making 100 yds and in very easy work. If the brightness is increased I think it will make for a very good setup. In looking at the proposed reticle both lit and unlit the only change I would make is to illuminate either both lower stadia lines or at least a dot at the intersection of the stadia lines and the post. This would assist in not only low light reticle acquisition but also help if the lighting on the target puts the target in a shadow or low light.

On day two of testing I was able to get the scope to a range where I could shoot however I wished. I set up a 100 yd target and one at 25 yds (I set them 5yds apart in lateral distance) in order to see how transitioning from the scope to my handguard mounted irons would work. With the scope on 1x it was exceptionally easy. I tried the same drill on 2, 3, and 4x with the same results. This scope is listed as a true 1x and I found that there was no difference in image size once you were looking past 5-7 yds. I understand this is standard for 1x optics (I am open to any input if you are more educated than me on the subject). I then tried the same transition looking only through the scope. As you can imagine on 1x and 2x the drill was very easy. As I proceeded to 3x and 4x the FOV did slow me down a bit however I was still able to make solid hits with reasonable split times.

So far these are the only two shooting sessions I have had a chance to complete. I will post another review shortly. I have a night/lowlight 3gun match on the July 23, and a regular 3 gun on July 30th. I will be using this optic and report back.

At this point my recommendations are simply:

Keep the scope as close to $300 as possible.

Increase the brightness range to allow a higher overall brightness.

Illuminate not only the dot and ring but stadia lines or markers as well.

Take care, Craig

[smokshwn]

more pics

[Wakal]

Nice review! We need more decent optics in the sub-$300 range

BTW, love that compensator!

Yours,

Alex

[smokshwn]

Alex,

Thanks, that is a nice barrel and comp isn't it? I am actually very excited to see how the final reticle/illumination turns out. If it comes in right I think Mueller will have a winner on their hands.

Craig

[Wakal]

I think a cheap (comparitively speaking) 1-4 illuminated will do very well. The only fairly decent variable is the Simmons 1.5-5 20mm (aka "The Benny Scope"), and that is 1.5. I have to squint a bit with my IOR 1.1-4, and am not that happy running Liota's 1.5-5 Leupold at close stuff. Something (that doens't break the bank too much) to put on my Tactibilly rifle would be cool!

Alex

[raz-0]

Ok, bringing it back from the dead..

What ever happened to this scope.. as far as i can tell it's still vaporware.

Any updates?

[smokshwn]

Raz,

I am still running the prototype but I haven't heard from Rich for quite some time. I think he has simply been working on other projects. After RM3G I am going to try to get a hold of him again.

If it gets produced for the price point he talked about I think it will be the shiznit for three gunners.

I'll keep you posted, Craig

[benny hill]

What is the F.O.V. @ 100? This will determine if it worth useing or not. I hope it is at least 80 ft or bigger.

[smokshwn]

Benny,

I can't recall off of the spec sheet exactly, but I want to say 97ft at 1X and 41ft at 4X.

When I get a chance I will try to remember to step it off. But when I first was giving the scope a workout I remember using the target pit at my range as a guestimate and the specs seemed to be correct.

Craig