Meopta K-Dot vs S&B Short Dot vs Swarovski Z6i vs Trijicon TR24 vs

[Pro2AInPA]

One of these 5 scopes will be my new 3 gun optic. Unfortunately I don't have the type of shops around here that carry high end glass, nor do I shoot with anyone who spends the dough on high end glass. So I'm going to have to make a decision on my research here online.

The way I understand things:

K-Dot

Pros: Nice reticle, good glass, daylight visible illumination, affordable compared to Short Dot.

Cons: Heavy, big.

Short Dot

Pros: Quality glass, great build quality, excellent reticle, daylight visible illumination.

Cons: Cost

Z6i

Pros: 1-6x as ooposed to 1-4x, circle dot reticle is said to be great, daylight visible illumination, amazing glass.

Cons: Cost!

TR24

Pros: Affordable price point, no batteries, decent glass.

Cons: No ranging reticle options.

SN4-s

Pros: Built like a tank, excellent glass, excellent reticles

Cons: Cost, illumination is not daylight visible.

Do I have the pros and cons of these scopes nailed down pretty well? It's really really tough to decide without being able to try them first. If you guys were looking for a scope for a dedicated 3 gun rig and you could STRETCH to afford the Short Dot or the Z6i, but could more comfortably afford the other options, what would you do?

Right now, I'm leaning pretty heavily toward the K-Dot, but I'd like input from you guys first.

[dak]

One of these 5 scopes will be my new 3 gun optic. Unfortunately I don't have the type of shops around here that carry high end glass, nor do I shoot with anyone who spends the dough on high end glass. So I'm going to have to make a decision on my research here online.

The way I understand things:

K-Dot

Pros: Nice reticle, good glass, daylight visible illumination, affordable compared to Short Dot.

Cons: Heavy, big.

Short Dot

Pros: Quality glass, great build quality, excellent reticle, daylight visible illumination.

Cons: Cost

Z6i

Pros: 1-6x as ooposed to 1-4x, circle dot reticle is said to be great, daylight visible illumination, amazing glass.

Cons: Cost!

TR24

Pros: Affordable price point, no batteries, decent glass.

Cons: No ranging reticle options.

SN4-s

Pros: Built like a tank, excellent glass, excellent reticles

Cons: Cost, illumination is not daylight visible.

Do I have the pros and cons of these scopes nailed down pretty well? It's really really tough to decide without being able to try them first. If you guys were looking for a scope for a dedicated 3 gun rig and you could STRETCH to afford the Short Dot or the Z6i, but could more comfortably afford the other options, what would you do?

Right now, I'm leaning pretty heavily toward the K-Dot, but I'd like input from you guys first.

You're missing one obvious candidate, the Zeiss Variopoint 1,1-4x24.

That is my choice. Along with the Swaro it has the clearest optics of them all, in my openion comes out ahead because it's very forgiving for eye-placement. The Swaro would be better if it wasn't for this due to the 2x more magnification, but it's rather picky on where you position your eye.

Dagfinn

edit: punctation and spelling

Edited November 18, 2009 by dak

[mpeltier]

Witch scope best suits you is something only you can decide. Usually this will cost you time and money. I will give you my conclusion after trying several of those mentioned but you may not agree after trying them yourself. All sighting systems are a compromise somewhere, and you must decide what to compromise.

Meopta is great glass with a good reticle. The turrets leave something to be desired as does the battery life. The hunter style turrets are horrible if you like to dial differant zero's (I do). There is no battery saving auto shut-off, have spares in your range bag.

Swarovski has absolutely first rate build quality, and you pay for it. 6x is more than you need and i seldom used it. On occasion it was so much power that it would hinder speed on some stages (stages with targets from 150 to 450 yds for example). The turrets are not bad. They are target style, but not marked in MOA, and the markings are small. The reticle is ok if you like a circle dot, but the orange color for me sucks. I would have prefered a red reticle. Battery saving feature was very good.

Trijicon TR24 is good glass, maybee not swarovski good, but only at dusk could i tell a differance in clarity, and even then you really had to go back and forth between them to find any differance in the brightness. It has no battery saving feature, but scince there are no batteries it doesn't need one. Turrets are target style and marked in MOA, but you have to be careful with them if you take the caps off, as they move very easily, not nearly as tight as the swarovski. i use and greatly prefer the red triangle reticle. i see red incredibly well, without even thinking about it. The point of the triangle is very sharp and precise, and is what i use at distance. I zero using the tip of the point. close up i use the triangle just like a dot, and center it on my target. close up head shots are a breeze this way as it is self compensating for the lower impact of scope offset at close range. This is currently what i use and have sold the Meopta nad Swarovski. I dont miss either of them.

Burris XTR, Had horrible illumination, Reticle was too busy. Adjustment of the 1-4 power range was turning the entire occular, yuck. I have heard the illumination is better, some have said it isn't. Even if it were it is not the scope for me. I do not care for BDC type reticles. I prefer to dial in a zero to suite the stage.

I have not tried the Nightforce or the S&B as the reticle design of each is not to my liking.

[P.E. Kelley]

I would at least add the IOR PitBull to the list.

1x is wicked fast up close (I say this as a long time iron sight shooter)

Switch to 4x for easy hits at distance using the reticle marks.

Patrick

[kgunz11]

But Patrick, is it daylight illuminated???

[00bullitt]

Also consider first and second focal plane reticles. The USO and S&B scopes are first/front focal plane. There are one or two Short Dots that are rear but have a dot type reticle with no stadia tree. The new Lund reticle in the USO scope is in the rear focal plane. Front/first focal plane reticles increase in size with increase in magnification. Rear/second plane reticles do not. They are constant. I cannot stand a front focal plane reticle on a low power optic.

I have had all the scopes you listed. I now have a Swarovski Z6. I think it is the best thing going for 3 gun IMO. The one compromise is the turrets. I'd prefer them to be like Leupolds Mk4 M3 turrets. But they work well as they are and as little as I do dial.....its the compromise. If the cost is the real issue....then I would consider the Meopta. For the money....I really like it. Rumor is that Meopta will unveil their new scope at SHOT in January. Its been in the works for the past 2 years.

I also really want to get my hands on a Pitbull to give it a shake even though its not daylight illuminated although my luck with IOR in the past has been horrendous.

Its a neat optic.

[Merlin Orr]

Meopta still is the standard for 3Gun.

A nice balanced package with the stuff we actually use.

[apriav]

The IOR PitBull is my choice. I shot a 1.1x4 IOR for years and the Pitbull is better. That large 35MM tube gives you a better field of view, it's clear and fast, 1/4 turn you go from 1 to 4. MGM makes a killer speed lever that is a must to have.

[Doug H.]

I have had both the Meopta and the Swaro and the Z6i is a much better scope in optical quality and field of view. The ocular lens (the lens closest to your eye)on the Z6i is 50% larger than the Meopta ocular lens. You notice the difference when you mount the rifle, with the Swaro you don't really see the scope, just the view especially at 1 power. The extra magnification is really nice on long targets, because 6 power is 1.5x 4 power the targets appear 50% larger. You have to be judicious with the use of the higher power as it can cause problems due to the smaller field of view.

In terms of bang for the buck, the Meopta is a better choice. If you have the funds and like cool toys, get the Swarovski.

Doug

[rtr]

I currently own a second generation Short Dot. The only other 3gun scope I have significant experience with is the TA-11 ACOG.

The Pitbull that I got to play with was not daytime visible, and it is either 1 or 4 nothing inbetween, sometimes 2 or 3 power is useful.

The Kdot that I played with seemed fine, there is a reason so many 3gunners use them. Only big I have heard are the turrets.

The Accupoint is great for the money, would be nice if it had a reticle more similar to the ACOGs.

Have no experience with the USO or Swaro.

I really like my Short Dot, the dot is daylight visible, the stadia lines allow you flexibility in terms of what load you use so you can come up with a setup that should work for you no matter what bullet you shoot. The turrets are also useful so if you have to dial for a really long shot you can. I got my Short Dot for $1600 used on arfcom and that was with a Larue mount. I have seen others on there in the $1700 range.

Here are weights of a few of them (from data on the manufacturers websites). Note the S&B is heaviest

Kdot 18.7 oz

S&B 20.1oz

Swaro 16.2oz

Accupoint 14.4 oz

Edited November 18, 2009 by rtr

[kellyn]

I wonder how Team Leupold does so well not shooting all of these scopes?

[00bullitt]

I wonder how Team Leupold does well not shooting all of these scopes?

What can you say.....when yer good......yer good

[P.E. Kelley]

I wonder how Team Leupold does well not shooting all of these scopes?

Excellent point!

Que the broken record (CD?) "Pick One and Practice"

By the way "the papers want to know whose shirts you wear"

Patrick

[Alaskapopo]

Meopta still is the standard for 3Gun.

A nice balanced package with the stuff we actually use.

I beat my buddy in a match because his Meopta went black on him during a stage due to the suns position. I had no problem with my Swarovski. Score one Swarovski. However I do wish the Swarovski had a BDC.

Pat

Here are the videos.

Him

The sun stopped him for a time we thought he had a gun malfunction. He ended up having to hold his hand over the scope so he could see.

Me. I was happy with this stage. This was a rifle only match with 3 stages. I got first place in this stage and in the long range standards which was enough to get me first place in the match. I absolutely love my Swarovski

Edited November 20, 2009 by Alaskapopo

[bigbrowndog]

it doesn't mean the Swaro, is better suited for shooting into the sun, just that in that instance with you behind it, it worked out. Your buddy could have had the same problem using your Swaro.

Merlin is correct, right now the best for the money is the Meopta, with the TR24 being right there as well its just too new to draw definite conclusions on. Everything else is just more or less, not necessarily better or worse!!

trapr

[Alaskapopo]

it doesn't mean the Swaro, is better suited for shooting into the sun, just that in that instance with you behind it, it worked out. Your buddy could have had the same problem using your Swaro.

Merlin is correct, right now the best for the money is the Meopta, with the TR24 being right there as well its just too new to draw definite conclusions on. Everything else is just more or less, not necessarily better or worse!!

trapr

For the money I would agree. But money aside I feel the Swarovski is the better scope. The one thing the Meopta does have that Iwish the Swarovski did is multiple aimpoints.

Pat

[DMAC]

I would look at all of them and decide which is best for you. I couldn't justify spending $2500 on a scope for shooting 5-6 3 Gun Matches a year. I went with the Meopta and found one new for $600. It is what made sense for me.

[Alaskapopo]

I would look at all of them and decide which is best for you. I couldn't justify spending $2500 on a scope for shooting 5-6 3 Gun Matches a year. I went with the Meopta and found one new for $600. It is what made sense for me.

Understand. That is one hell of a deal you got on the Meopta. I also paid a lot less for my Swarovski that retail as they have a great LEO and Military price discount.

Pat

[Revopop]

I would look at all of them and decide which is best for you. I couldn't justify spending $2500 on a scope for shooting 5-6 3 Gun Matches a year. I went with the Meopta and found one new for $600. It is what made sense for me.

I agree completely, but for me it was a Millet DMS-1.

[Alaskapopo]

I would at least add the IOR PitBull to the list.

1x is wicked fast up close (I say this as a long time iron sight shooter)

Switch to 4x for easy hits at distance using the reticle marks.

Patrick

Yea now if the reticle were lit brightly in the day it would be a good scope.

Pat